Do I have to know who some guy is behind a computer claiming to be whomever he wants to know when someone is talking out of their a$$?
I don't know who you are but I know you love to sling a lot of BS claims.
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
I don't know who you are but I know you love to sling a lot of BS claims.
Generally, it becomes obvious when a person isn't capable of learning or willing to learn anything new. And this is evident from you. How about just going into his profile and reading up about him?
A profile doesn't do much at all. I can claim to be Queen of England. Besides I go by what he post and he thinks the french plane with tanks and weapons (F3 version) can go mach 2 plus. That tells me all I need to know what he is all about.
The least we ask you to do is not to distort my words in order to criticise them, I know that it is sometimes too subtle for you but make an effort:
- I didn't talk about the maximum speed of the Mirage 2000 with payload,
- So I didn't say anything about a Mach 2 payload.
- I talked about the Rafale being able to go to Mach 1.8 with payload if the payloads support it
- I specified that the 2000 L tanks were limited to Mach 1.6
- And I said that supersonic tanks could reach Mach 1.8
Let me guess. A deceitful, old, demented frog, who lives on AD. Who use to be a jumped up, security shower of a gate guard ?
Pic-oil, the actual Rafale fuel fraction was .4295, but I was nice and rounded it up to .430. For your fantasy load, 3x 2k tanks and when a 1,000kg bomb is cleared in station 2 and its opposite, in F4.
Last edited:
BS the 2,000 litre tank is subsonic design. Also because the weight, drag of weapons and tanks. It would limit the Rafale to be subsonic.
External tanks - Rafaut Group
RAFAUT group designs the devices on behalf of the French Ministry of Defense for more than 50 years. The group is specialized in different mission systems.
- Dassault Rafale 1250 and 2000 liter external fuel tanks
- Supersonic design (1250 liters)
Last edited:
For this configuration we don't need to wait for F4, it was already possible with F2 and in any case the fuel fraction is not important, what is important is the autonomy of the aircraft and this is largely better with the Rafale because the F-35 has the aerodynamics of a subsonic guinea fowl and an engine whose specific consumption is less good than that of the M-88.
Show me. You previously said that the storm is cleared for station 2, but the clearance for station 2 of a 1k bomb would be F4.
So now that it is shown that the F-35 flies further, than a Rafale with 2x 1k bombs and tanks. it's not important.
You know very well if the F3 french plane could go mach 1.8 with combat load Dassault would be shouting that capability from rooftops just like they do with their supercruise claim of center tank and 6 air to air missiles.... oh wait they don't! French plane prototype did mach 2+ clean with F-18 hornet engines F1 french plane used M88s the same ones being used today on F3s according to SAFRAN CEO and it was those engines on that production model french plane that did mach 1.8 CLEAN!
You also need to qualify that it is in straight and level flight. Pilot claims, while diving from 50k ft to 25k ft doesn't mean much
Do you really not understand anything, or are you distorting my words on purpose?
Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion
Station 2 is already cleared for 1000 kg bomb, what is now in test for F4 is to open a new station , the station 3 which exist on all Rafale but is not used until now. And this station will be for MICA NG and 1000 kg modular air to ground bomb that is to say an 1000 kg AASM and not an ordinary 1000 kg Bomb. With these new Station open the Rafale will have 14 stations open on which you would carry 5 drop tank two pods and six weapons that could be two 1000kg bombs and 4 Missiles. And it is the configuration I gave to you, that you refuse to take into consideration because it hurts you too much.
As to another station, it is never going to be funded. The cost of redoing the lifetime frame test, flight control systems and remapping the EM.
Correction it is station 3. Show me a where they say a 1,000kg bomb is cleared for station 3. I can show you where it's cleared for station 4 and it's opposite and the centre. For a total of 3 possible. This is when you told me station 3 will be cleared in F4.
This is it being flight tested last year.
www.theweek.in
correction it is station 3
Correction it is station 3. Show me a where they say a 1,000kg bomb is cleared for station 3. I can show you where it's cleared for station 4 and it's opposite and the centre. For a total of 3 possible. This is when you told me station 3 will be cleared in F4.
This is it being flight tested last year.
‘Bunker buster’ for Rafale: Fighter tests 1,000kg version of HAMMER missile
Safran states this new weapon will give the Rafale an enhanced strike capability
correction it is station 3
Last edited:
You are also getting mixed up. station 1 and 2 is A2A missiles, low weight. As we have already said, station 3 is going to be cleared, for 1000kg bombs and AASM. Station 4 is current has tank or bomb, as per the chart.
Bombs or tanks can be put on 3, 4, 7/8, 10, 11 These are the 5 wet points, if you put on 1,000kg it replaces a tank. Max is 3 tanks and 2x heavy bombs/missiles. when station 3 and 11 are cleared for heavy bombs/missiles.
No the point numbers on this graph are not the same as those used in the video I posted, the only point that is not open on the Rafale is the point that is numbered 2 or 13 on your graph and is designated 3 in the video because it is the third from the fuselage. On your graph, it is planned that it can be used to carry a MICA missile and the novelty of F4 is that it will also be possible to carry 1000 kg bombs on this point.
Are you trolling?
An interest in the Aussie loyal wingman. a big bomb on station 3, time 1:09
F4 at 1:55
An interest in the Aussie loyal wingman. a big bomb on station 3, time 1:09
F4 at 1:55
Last edited:
Lockheed Re-Affirms Spanish F-35 Talks Despite Madrid Denial | Aviation Week Network
At the Dubai Airshow a Lockheed Martin executive says discussions continue with the Spanish government on orders.
aviationweek.com
The F-22 was under serious political fire thanks to American adventures in Iraq, if the F-15s performed to capacity then there is no need for F-22-- optimist is right. The US never publishes losing results unless they want something. F-22 was a highly political lightning rod from nearly start to finish. troops were getting killed by IEDs while the USAF was getting hundred million dollar plus super fighters to fight an enemy that collapsed 15 years prior. it was a terrible look
I love Russian stuff as much as the next guy, they are beautiful looking flying machines, but I am under no illusions about their capability. and the monkey model excuse is not only old, tired and pathetic, but also self defeating. The internet needed an excuse and the monkey model thing which I saw introduced decades before the collapse of the USSR has become the main excuse. Other popular excuses included blaming the operators. these aircraft just are not great mysteries anymore. When its actual real shooting wars, and not games or exercises, the US takes no chances and we see terribly lopsided kill ratios.
The Idea that as the USSR Super Power collapsed, funding dried up, and Russian aircraft started to suddenly excel in areas that take money and lots of research, that they traditionally always suffered in thanks to magic, is simply unbelievable. There is a cohort of people like yourself who then invent the most bombastic claims that fly in the face reality.
The most amazing thing about Russians is they can keep re-inventing the same thing and some people just can't help but believe it. Back in the old days, before people decided that non stealth aircraft can be stealth with some new paint and a little RAM on the front these kinds of claims were actually laughable.
he told us he was a pensioner now when he was called out for thinking a model on a desk was meaningful.
Rafale costs at a minimum 2.1 billion US dollars more in the bid in Switzerland. It may be even more than that, we just know that the Swiss only disclosed the next lowest bid was 2.1 billion more but didn't disclose who 2nd place was
Behold the most circular logic yet