Leaders not impressed by new Russian fighter

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Do you know the meaning of the word prototype?

did you understand the man when he said "at its current configuration"?

 

[illuminatidinesh]

He says its flattering for them the Russians copy.... How many times did they flatter the Russians?
The point is Russians r known for their ability to build hard wares in enormous numbers. Their products usually doesn't need high end of maintenance and just does the job no matter where u operate in the world.
Oh they r catching up quickly dont worry. Few weeks back they were bashing that its going to take another 5 years for prototype to appear.... Now they r doing the same for the induction..... Keep the good work.

 

[faithfulguy]

Yes you're right we have AESA and PESA with a range of 400km and A2A missle with a range of 175 km and our avionics are ****, our avionics and technical know how is so bad that the Americans even bought rocket engines from us.

US usually buy engines for study or sometimes, reverse engineering. Do you know that US reverse engineer certain aspects of Mitsubishi Zero and incorporate them into the P6 hellcats?

I wonder how advance is the Japanese avionics is now if they were able to continuously develop. Same as with the Germans.

 

[chachachoudhary]

I think only the potential buyers namely india and russia need to get impressed. It is of no importance for the developers what others think because sometimes....

GRAPES ARE SOUR.

 

[illuminatidinesh]

GRAPES ARE SOUR.

Bulls eye.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Well how the hell did the US know more about the aircraft...it has not even discovered its full flight envelope...hell, just 2 flights and they talk as if they know everything about it?...thats a propaganda article and let ditch it and move on. The First attempt on stealth was HO 228 which the NG has it at home. And the concept of radar deflection was put forth by a Soviet Physicist. You can google his name if you want to.

 

[gambit]

Well how the hell did the US know more about the aircraft...it has not even discovered its full flight envelope...hell, just 2 flights and they talk as if they know everything about it?...thats a propaganda article and let ditch it and move on.

How about just 2 flights and so many gullible people talked about how the PRAT-FALL is comparable to the F-22?

And the concept of radar deflection was put forth by a Soviet Physicist. You can google his name if you want to.

Wrong...The behavior of a radar signal upon a surface was already well known. What Ufimtsev did was create the equations that PREDICTED those behaviors on a complex body. The HO flying wing predated Ufimtsev's equations so that mean those behaviors were already known to both Allies and Nazi Germany.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

How about just 2 flights and so many gullible people talked about how the PRAT-FALL is comparable to the F-22?


Wrong...The behavior of a radar signal upon a surface was already well known. What Ufimtsev did was create the equations that PREDICTED those behaviors on a complex body. The HO flying wing predated Ufimtsev's equations so that mean those behaviors were already known to both Allies and Nazi Germany.

Yes they were 100% sure about it and I never denied it. There are no scholarly articles, just fanboy ones comparing it. First let the aircraft discover its full flight envelope then we can see. Yes both Nazi Germany and the Allies did know about Stealth. But The Nazi Germany made the first attempt...So can we say the B-2 is a copy of the HO 228 Flying wing design?...And without Ufimtsev's equation we cannot have designed or developed surface stealth. So give credit to Ufimtsev. If you had known about the "behaviour of radar signals on surface" why wasnt America the first to derive the equation? Yes HO 228 predated on Ufimtsev's design and you further perfected it by preying upon the HO 228. End of story.

Yes and according to me the Craptor is full of crap when compared to the PRAT-FALL which is yet to see it make its third flight. And it is not even in comparable terms yet.

 

[gambit]

Yes both Nazi Germany and the Allies did know about Stealth. But The Nazi Germany made the first attempt...So can we say the B-2 is a copy of the HO 228 Flying wing design?...

No, you cannot because the B-2, as a flying design was predated by the YB-49. The flying wing design was explored, NOT because of its effect on radar behavior but because of its aerodynamics. The HO 229's supposedly radar evading capability was of secondary importance...

Horten Ho 229 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After the war Reimar Horten said he mixed charcoal dust in with the wood glue to absorb electromagnetic waves (radar), which he believed could shield the aircraft from detection by British early warning ground-based radar known as Chain Home. In the modern era it became known that a flying wing design will reduce the aircraft's radar cross-section, though no wartime documents survive to confirm that the Hortens were working specifically on a radar-defeating aircraft.

Horten suspected those behavior and attempted to manipulate them. The flying wing design does have some low radar reflectivity properties but they were largely unexplored by Horten, more likely unknown by him.

And without Ufimtsev's equation we cannot have designed or developed surface stealth. So give credit to Ufimtsev.

Of course we do. Ufimtsev ended up with a professorship in the US. Can you show the readership where the US denied him his credit?

If you had known about the "behaviour of radar signals on surface" why wasnt America the first to derive the equation?

Because we did not have anyone sufficiently smart enough at that time. This is where you revealed your ignorance. Radar detection was developed upon the discovery of how radio communication signals reflected off natural and manmade structures such has hills and buildings. Even ships offshore reflected radio signals.

Radar

Robert Watson-Watt is given the credit for inventing the radar. In fact, this credit should go to the German engineer Christian Hulsmeyer who in 1904, using patented an early warning system for shipping. He, in turn, used a discovery by Heinrich Hertz who had discovered in 1888 that radio waves could be bounced off objects.

Got that? We discovered how radio waves reflected off bodies back iin 1888 and it took a couple decades to produce a radar detection device.

Yes HO 228 predated on Ufimtsev's design and you further perfected it by preying upon the HO 228. End of story.

Wrong...The flying wing design had nothing to do with the development of radar low observable designs. That distinction goes to the F-117, which as not a flying wing design. The B-2 simply combined the two, which is the flying wing design and shaping of that flying wing to produce a very low radar observable aircraft.

Yes and according to me the Craptor is full of crap when compared to the PRAT-FALL which is yet to see it make its third flight. And it is not even in comparable terms yet.

According to you? Your opinion is crap when the Raptor is deployed and the PRAT-FALL is still trying to walk.

 

[sivadreams]

How about just 2 flights and so many gullible people talked about how the PRAT-FALL is comparable to the F-22?

There is a difference in we talking about it and learned experts talking about it within two test runs. Unless they have some credible intelligence on this. Even if they do, I don't think so they will compromise on it by talking so openly.

I suspect this is a propaganda much necessitated due to pulling off the plug for F22 by Obama. Obviously, Americans will put together another program to counter this secretly. But, until that time this is what this is.

Wrong...The behavior of a radar signal upon a surface was already well known. What Ufimtsev did was create the equations that PREDICTED those behaviors on a complex body. The HO flying wing predated Ufimtsev's equations so that mean those behaviors were already known to both Allies and Nazi Germany.

Ufimtsev's theory of electromagnetic edge diffraction did lead to the concept of stealth in B-2. But this is mathematics but the credit does go to the individual who had applied it.

Like in the case of atom bomb.... Richard Garwin was the one who invented it, but the theory behind it was by our renowned Albert Einstein.

 

[Trichy]

He says its flattering for them the Russians copy.... How many times did they flatter the Russians?
The point is Russians r known for their ability to build hard wares in enormous numbers. Their products usually doesn't need high end of maintenance and just does the job no matter where u operate in the world.
Oh they r catching up quickly dont worry. Few weeks back they were bashing that its going to take another 5 years for prototype to appear.... Now they r doing the same for the induction..... Keep the good work.

hey bro just ignore them


Its indo-russian problem i think

why the others are so interest in it??? One word to say " WATCH YOUR BACK FIRST"

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

Thatz funny!!

Hitler's Stealth Bomber

B-2 Spirit

come on now

to be honest its not bad most lowtech radars wont see it or at least call it an aircraft...

 

[gambit]

Ufimtsev's theory of electromagnetic edge diffraction did lead to the concept of stealth in B-2. But this is mathematics but the credit does go to the individual who had applied it.

The first radar low observable aircraft that exploited Ufimtsev's equations was the F-117. Not the B-2. People are making erroneous assumptions and associations between the HO 229 and the B-2.

 

[S-A-B-E-R->]

dont want to be a buzz kill but america is using the same tactic india used with AK to chase away protential buyers by calling AK an upgraded t72...which is entirly in correct

 

[sivadreams]

Yes and according to me the Craptor is full of crap when compared to the PRAT-FALL which is yet to see it make its third flight. And it is not even in comparable terms yet.

Nope, Raptor is still a beautiful beast. Cost of maintenance is what is pulling it down. Its a 15yr old design. Lots of takeaway are there for next level of fifth gen from F-22 in a much affordable way. So no need to call it crap.