gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
Yes, and a radome is a structure that is made of composites and composites are constructed from different materials. This is further evidence of your small mind. You are incapable of thinking what is a substrate or a constituent child material in a composite parent.Wrong!
Transperancy is about how much the EM wave pass through the material!
By your misconception, the transparent Radome cannot pass the EM wave therefore the wave from the radar's transmitter behind the radome cannot deliver the wave outward.
Saying nothing in a technically relevant debate is lying by omission.Say nothing is not lying!
I do not care what you say about yourself. We already know that you are a liar.I am not saying I dont know, you liar.
Q: What is the dominant variable in longitudinal stability?
A: Power.
You said you answered that first year Basic Aerodynamics question to proved you had an aviation 'background'. Where is that post, liar?
If permeability does not allow permittivity, or to use another word permissivity, then what does? This is how you childishly debate in trying to hide your ignorance.I am afraid you dont know the meaning of permeability/permissivity, or have wrong understanding about them, as you think that transparency is due to permeability/permittivity
They could no more answer those questions as you proved yourself the liar about your aviation 'background' and 'study', but we will continue with that charade.You are proving what Martian says about you => ignorance, stubborn, tend to evade the debate by bringing other topic/question.
One more time...
Q: What constitute a 'successful' airframe design? Caveat: There are very few 'failure' with respect to 'successful'. Essentially, if an airframe flew, then it is not a failure because it exploited aerodynamic forces to its advantage to become airborne. So what this mean is that some airframes are less successful than others regarding their target audience or specific mission type. Then what other factors are there that would make some airframes more successful than others to the point where it serves as a standard to be measured against in terms of design? Hint: 3 items.
People? Who? Certainly not you or the Chinese boys here.He likes to copy paste long article from internet, but demonstrate misconception.
He think by dragging long article or long explanation he will be admitted as an expert
Instead people will judge his point/claims and bust his misconception.
The only thing you successfully done is spammed the discussion with garbage to hide the embarrassment that is your friends.I am the guy that will put YOU down everytime you try to take me on. Just like I have done now. I quite enjoy humiliating you old man.
What technical contributions have you done to 'humiliate' me, conscript reject?
Has the J-20 been proven even in an exercise? Wait...It is still in test fight stages. But already you Chinese boys are talking about taking out ships and basesF-22 craptor is an overhyped piece of trash that is not even proven in battle.
Kopp have no aviation background. Did you know that?If the F-22 craptor is trash, F-35 cant even fly (Carlo Kopp who is a real expert says so)
Must be tough to see your fellow Chinese, members of the 'superior' Asian race, be actually humiliated by a Viet.But im sure you know more than all these experts riiiight my vietnamese 'reeeeeeal' expert with playstation experience?
Riiiiight...For an aircraft that is still in the test flight stages.Not hard for the J-20 to surpass a fighter where the pilot will die due to no oxygen (F-22)
Debunked here a long time ago, conscript reject.