Cactus09
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2020
- Messages
- 389
- Likes
- 2,111
Yes. I used ASH to show a real practical example rather than just renders.thats for fa 18 super hornet
Yes. I used ASH to show a real practical example rather than just renders.thats for fa 18 super hornet
Galctic fighter uses Kejriwal air to ground and air to air missiles it perform dharna wherever it hits Pakistan Fizzaiya calls it aloo ka sona missileNo it can carry a destriyer in there , will release it near water surface , we can use it in pangong tso .
Still it is no match for galactic fighter 17
You forgot AK-49 kejriwalNo No Sir!
One bay for Rahul and another for his mummy and Insahllah we'll do bombing raids over Italy.
Yes this is the same used in F/A-18E/F Super Hornets but I highly doubt if we will work on it or not.Guys, chill. F22 will likely have an external enclosed weapons pod. That can be done for our AMCA as well. That will ensure high weapons carriage with very little increase in RCS.
View attachment 79546
View attachment 79547
View attachment 79548
we can get something like that for tejas mk2 as in an interview it was already said that rcs is less than mk1Yes this is the same used in F/A-18E/F Super Hornets but I highly doubt if we will work on it or not.
Mk2 RCS less than MK1? Where? DDR one? Please share...we can get something like that for tejas mk2 as in an interview it was already said that rcs is less than mk1
We can get it but we need to float a tender for a private company and give them contract to develop systems, which will boost efficiency unlike every burden on DRDO, this will be better.we can get something like that for tejas mk2 as in an interview it was already said that rcs is less than mk1
Sooner or later ot will be required. So yes it will be worked upon. And if it is made for Tejas Mk2, then I am 100% sure it will find its way to AMCA.Yes this is the same used in F/A-18E/F Super Hornets but I highly doubt if we will work on it or not.
no mk2 ones will not work on amca as design(of weapon pod) should be done in such a way that radar waves do not bounce back of the pod to the radar even after deflection of plane's bodySooner or later ot will be required. So yes it will be worked upon. And if it is made for Tejas Mk2, then I am 100% sure it will find its way to AMCA.
Ha wahi matlab hai. That if Tejas gets it then AMCA too will get it. Its not a question of whether we have the tech. But the requirements of IAF. Irrespective of that DRDO/ HAL can do it through tgeir own initiative and offer it to IAF.no mk2 ones will not work on amca as design(of weapon pod) should be done in such a way that radar waves do not bounce back of the pod to the radar even after deflection of plane's body
Weapon pods also increases the surface area and drag,with minimal profit in the RCS,f18 still a 4th gen and will ve hardly any advantage with those pods ...If the principles have been worked out and a weapons pod has been tested on F/A-18 (resulting in a drop in RCS), a pod should reduce RCS when used on other types, surely?
Pods are for non stealth aircraft hence have 0 usage in 5th gen aircraft, so pods are out of question, and we’ll have stealth wingmans and GHATAK UCAVs for additional payload carrying and payload deployment.Weapon pods also increases the surface area and drag,with minimal profit in the RCS,f18 still a 4th gen and will ve hardly any advantage with those pods ...
When f 35 is planned to have 6 missile in near future , isn't it possible that we can develop it in 2030 , also no need to increase number of pylon , the middle two pylons can be made dual missile pylon with 3 d staggered arrangement .Pods are for non stealth aircraft hence have 0 usage in 5th gen aircraft, so pods are out of question, and we’ll have stealth wingmans and GHATAK UCAVs for additional payload carrying and payload deployment.
That still doesn't help in the reduction of the radar signature of the aircraft itself,but of course increments the life span of missiles....Pods are for non stealth aircraft hence have 0 usage in 5th gen aircraft, so pods are out of question, and we’ll have stealth wingmans and GHATAK UCAVs for additional payload carrying and payload deployment.
Won't these bulky structure increase manuverabilityThat still doesn't help in the reduction of the radar signature of the aircraft itself,but of course increments the life span of missiles....
pods will be useful for aircraft like tedbf which are designed for reduced rcs specially from the front, A pod will make tedbf much ore capableWeapon pods also increases the surface area and drag,with minimal profit in the RCS,f18 still a 4th gen and will ve hardly any advantage with those pods ...
Sir pls join ADA...A.concept in my mind , in future can there be any possibility where missile carries a light pullover type cover , very light in weight which they can drop, when being launched , those cover should be shaped like they touch wing surface , and hiding all radar signature , cheap in cost , manufactured in large number , not bulky , so if these cover last 4 5 flight would be enough .
Every fighter will have it's specific cover depending on it's wing surface , curvature .