>>>For this answer you must think in geometric terms because we are talking about radar deflection on certain physical planes (I wish I could draw this out but I will do my best to describe it instead). The design of a faceted airframe drastically reduces the number of specular directions from which large echoes are observed but this faceting creates a multiple of ''edges''. The scattering of radar signatures then is spread over the shape of a cone. When viewed from a normal incidence, the ''edge'' collapses to a disk and the intensity can be strong enough to be picked up by even relatively weak radar. Even if you manage to angle a surface so that the surface is never seen from a direction anywhere near the direction of its ''surface normal'', there still may be an edge with a large number of of specular directions spread over a plane perpendicular to the edge. So even though aviation manufacturers may rely on shaping to direct a specular surface reflection away from the radar, they must also rely on shaping to direct edge scattering away from radar. This means you choose the sweep angle of the wing to direct the edge diffraction out of the threat cone, which is usually centered on the direction of flight.
The only part of the frontal wing area that contributes to refelection is the space between slats... And then we talk about certain slats angles... You can add angles in the space between the slats to that to avoid it. The F22 has a good example how to do that. There is no impact for x degrees or more... Any fighterjet has sweep in its wing unless you talk about ww2 era... And even those have minor radar reflection if you take the wing. Just in case we do not have the same idea... RCS is often only the frontal section. So we talking about head on. If you talk about above or lower then you just might think about curving but it will have lots of impact on your weight cause making that stiff enough will cost you enough headache. Since you talk about sweep I guess you are talking about frontal area... I am looking forward to a drawing cause sofar there is no reason for me to change practice or theory.
>>>No arguments here, this is why I stated the key is in RCS reduction though nothing wrong with having the capability on your side when **** hits the fan.
If you have something like F22 and even then the plane is nothing without superb network of sats and radar. There is no **** that comes from India. They had some with Mig25 but if they had something like that now we would sit in bunkers in Islamabad. Don't go overestimating everyone... One side you talk about getting Mirage 2000 and the other side you think that even JSF is not good enough.
>>>If your AWACS goes offline in a variety of conceivable scenarios, it will not have dire consequences for the entire fleet if your top tier fighter aircraft have powerful AESA radars. Our AWACS should be used to direct the Thunder and F-16 among various others and that in itself is more than 300 aircraft being directed by a handful of AWACS platforms.
Do you think that anyone would add an awacs that could go offline? The AESA is not a magic stick... At the moment you are talking about development and not active. The power of awacs depend on size and computing power (often even related to cooling power). Good luck in adding something good enough is a "light" fighter. And just in cast you do not know... The radar is not that cheap that you would go for 100+... Otherwise everyone would have one.
Just for fun... Do you have technical or airforce background? Not to irritate you but I miss often facts in your theories.
The only part of the frontal wing area that contributes to refelection is the space between slats... And then we talk about certain slats angles... You can add angles in the space between the slats to that to avoid it. The F22 has a good example how to do that. There is no impact for x degrees or more... Any fighterjet has sweep in its wing unless you talk about ww2 era... And even those have minor radar reflection if you take the wing. Just in case we do not have the same idea... RCS is often only the frontal section. So we talking about head on. If you talk about above or lower then you just might think about curving but it will have lots of impact on your weight cause making that stiff enough will cost you enough headache. Since you talk about sweep I guess you are talking about frontal area... I am looking forward to a drawing cause sofar there is no reason for me to change practice or theory.
>>>No arguments here, this is why I stated the key is in RCS reduction though nothing wrong with having the capability on your side when **** hits the fan.
If you have something like F22 and even then the plane is nothing without superb network of sats and radar. There is no **** that comes from India. They had some with Mig25 but if they had something like that now we would sit in bunkers in Islamabad. Don't go overestimating everyone... One side you talk about getting Mirage 2000 and the other side you think that even JSF is not good enough.
>>>If your AWACS goes offline in a variety of conceivable scenarios, it will not have dire consequences for the entire fleet if your top tier fighter aircraft have powerful AESA radars. Our AWACS should be used to direct the Thunder and F-16 among various others and that in itself is more than 300 aircraft being directed by a handful of AWACS platforms.
Do you think that anyone would add an awacs that could go offline? The AESA is not a magic stick... At the moment you are talking about development and not active. The power of awacs depend on size and computing power (often even related to cooling power). Good luck in adding something good enough is a "light" fighter. And just in cast you do not know... The radar is not that cheap that you would go for 100+... Otherwise everyone would have one.
Just for fun... Do you have technical or airforce background? Not to irritate you but I miss often facts in your theories.
