By: haavarla
- 5th August 2018 at 12:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Two Aircraft.. what Aircraft?
It sound like you talking about AWACS.
In that case, you only need one aircraft.
On larger airforce you often go on patrol/ Intercept Mission with two(sometimes 4) fighters.
Eighter way, you always splitt up with two flights, Lead and wingman.
That means you have to fly very close to each other, which in turn means you just scan the same sector of airspace.
Besides, fighter with ESA + Gimbals have datalink as well..
By: stealthflanker
- 5th August 2018 at 13:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And you seems to be out of touch regarding radar service hours
The AESA on both SH and F-15 had TERRIBLE sustainment hours..
Will having gimbals fix the matter ?
Then if AESA is terrible.. how does it compare to just 200-500hr of conventional TWT which BTW will also make your radar completely unusable when it fails.
By: FBW
- 5th August 2018 at 13:35Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And you seems to be out of touch regarding radar service hours
The AESA on both SH and F-15 had TERRIBLE sustainment hours..
What are you babbling about “sustainment hours”? Are you talking about MTBF, or maintenance hours?
And secondly, where exactly are you getting this information.
Edit- forget it, I know exactly what you are referring to. F-18E/F dot&e. Too bad you didn’t actually read it. The problem with early versions was software instability of the APG-79 (which was improved by newer software drops). Nothing on the APG-63v3. Both are worlds better in reliability and maintenance ease than any mechanical array. The use of LRU solves the maintenance headaches of legacy radar systems.
By: Spyhawk
- 5th August 2018 at 13:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Two Aircraft.. what Aircraft?
It sound like you talking about AWACS.
In that case, you only need one aircraft.
On larger airforce you often go on patrol/ Intercept Mission with two(sometimes 4) fighters.
Eighter way, you always splitt up with two flights, Lead and wingman.
That means you have to fly very close to each other, which in turn means you just scan the same sector of airspace.
Besides, fighter with ESA + Gimbals have datalink as well..
If you are referring to my post above, I was specifically talking about lead and wingman - in a gimbal setup, with each one covering one side.
By: Agrippa
- 5th August 2018 at 15:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The small number of T/R modules of the side arrays provides inferior performance compared to a gimballed array, but the mechanical steering comes with a signature penalty, which VLO aircraft cannot afford.
By: halloweene
- 5th August 2018 at 15:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good thing both F-35 and F-22 GaN upgrade is just around the corner!!
Did not mean that. However GaN modules are reportedly present on Gripen E electronic war suite aswell as tile architecture modules on F3R version of Spectra. Remember that old Thales scientific ppt? Distributed apertures are on their way for Rafale (i'd say not before MLU aka 2030 or about btw.)
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 5th August 2018 at 12:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Two Aircraft.. what Aircraft?
It sound like you talking about AWACS.
In that case, you only need one aircraft.
On larger airforce you often go on patrol/ Intercept Mission with two(sometimes 4) fighters.
Eighter way, you always splitt up with two flights, Lead and wingman.
That means you have to fly very close to each other, which in turn means you just scan the same sector of airspace.
Besides, fighter with ESA + Gimbals have datalink as well..
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 5th August 2018 at 12:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Multiple array is something new. It can only be mounted on larger class fighter due to power and space issues.
Lets wait and judge about this shall we..
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 5th August 2018 at 12:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And you seems to be out of touch regarding radar service hours
The AESA on both SH and F-15 had TERRIBLE sustainment hours..
Posts: 906
By: stealthflanker - 5th August 2018 at 13:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Will having gimbals fix the matter ?
Then if AESA is terrible.. how does it compare to just 200-500hr of conventional TWT which BTW will also make your radar completely unusable when it fails.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 5th August 2018 at 13:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
GaN incoming should allow lower power space issues. Tile architecture modules aswell for space issues.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 5th August 2018 at 13:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What are you babbling about “sustainment hours”? Are you talking about MTBF, or maintenance hours?
And secondly, where exactly are you getting this information.
Edit- forget it, I know exactly what you are referring to. F-18E/F dot&e. Too bad you didn’t actually read it. The problem with early versions was software instability of the APG-79 (which was improved by newer software drops). Nothing on the APG-63v3. Both are worlds better in reliability and maintenance ease than any mechanical array. The use of LRU solves the maintenance headaches of legacy radar systems.
Posts: 175
By: Spyhawk - 5th August 2018 at 13:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you are referring to my post above, I was specifically talking about lead and wingman - in a gimbal setup, with each one covering one side.
Posts: 48
By: Agrippa - 5th August 2018 at 15:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The small number of T/R modules of the side arrays provides inferior performance compared to a gimballed array, but the mechanical steering comes with a signature penalty, which VLO aircraft cannot afford.
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 5th August 2018 at 15:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes and cloaking generator should also improve RCS..
Seriously.
Good thing both F-35 and F-22 GaN upgrade is just around the corner!!
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 5th August 2018 at 15:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Did not mean that. However GaN modules are reportedly present on Gripen E electronic war suite aswell as tile architecture modules on F3R version of Spectra. Remember that old Thales scientific ppt? Distributed apertures are on their way for Rafale (i'd say not before MLU aka 2030 or about btw.)
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 5th August 2018 at 17:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No response on your absurd claims on he APG-79, 63 huh haavarla? Well that’s to b expected when you talk out of your rear.
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 5th August 2018 at 18:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think he is too busy figuring out when each JSF partner nations will individually sign LOT-11 contracts...
Posts: 2,619
By: topspeed - 6th August 2018 at 05:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How does a pilot sit in a Gripen ? Is it reclined a bit ? Like F-16 ?
Posts: 906
By: stealthflanker - 6th August 2018 at 11:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looks to me it's reclined
https://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/723226/40-france-navy-dassault-rafale-m/
click on the link. it's a Gripen photo inside.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 6th August 2018 at 12:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Definitely reclined (i sat in it). Can't tell you how many degrees however.
Posts: 175
By: Spyhawk - 6th August 2018 at 13:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Looks like it's 30 degrees (close to the 30-31 degrees of the F-16), but I couldn't find any number from official source.
Posts: 2,619
By: topspeed - 6th August 2018 at 19:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Viggen was mentioned with 19 degs.
Posts: 893
By: OPIT - 6th August 2018 at 19:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
28 degrees
Posts: 2,619
By: topspeed - 6th August 2018 at 19:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good find.
I would have guessed less.
Posts: 4,951
By: MadRat - 15th August 2018 at 13:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There comes a certain point where too much turns your vertical stab into a slicer.