It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Encyclopedia of non american stealth planes

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Originally posted by intelgurl
matej
A very informative topic - my compliments...



Aahhh the stamp of assurance....


yup, when she says it, your welcome here all the time, and will be welcomed witha nice greeting, so far, i haven't gotten my stamp of approval, because when i got here, i was a hellraiser, right away got on everyone's nerves, lol, that was fun

anyways, serious now, will the MCA incoporate any stealthy applications, such as RAM, coat paintings, it doesn't look like it has a RAS, tailless, thats kool, why are so many designs coming with out tails? whats the advantage?




posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Once again from the beginning...

Dima: The MiG 3.01 was really a project of bomber. It was planned, that the future replacement of MiG-31 will be MiG 7.01 MDP [Mnogofunkcionalnyj Dalnyj Pjerechvatchik]. Firstly it was a derivate from Sukhoi S-60 tactical bomber [proposed Su24 replacement], but then it was transformed to heavy fighter with no cannards and double delta wing. The connection between Sukhoi and Mig 7.01 is, that at late 80s the group of sukhoi s constructers went to MiG, because they do not want to work under some chairman [i do not remember his name, it started with S]. The project of MiG 3.01 started later.

Intelgurl: many thanks

Daedalus3: later I will look to my dictionary, what does it mean stamp of assurance :-]

A bit word about LCA and MCA: the LCA, developed in cooperation with france Dassault is no stealthy. India believe, that MCA will, but now it is only the concept. My opinon is, that it wont be build. India does not have the experience for such a complex and advanced plane [the reason, why they cooperate with Dassault on LCA is, that they went into troubles and did not have solution]. They will buy the new generation fighter from Russia or will cooperate on the development [Sukhoi T-50].



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
So, shortly to answer:

tsuribito: The Horten Ho-229 was built (but not flown) in 1944 and american B-2 was flown at 1990. Who is copying whom? The details and pictures of Sukhoi T-12 are available at my web www.hitechweb.szm.sk/stealth4c.htm Unfortunatelly, text is only in slovak language. There was also another design - flying wing concept - that I will add to my page sometime at the end of february. By the way, Soviet designers also used flying wing concept in Tu-202 project - competitor to B-2. I forgot to tell about it in one of my previous topics. It will be also add to my page at the end of february.






waynos: The MiG 1.42 or MiG-39 in VVS designation is a serial configuration of MiG MFI proposal. MiG 1.44 is a simplyfied flying demonstrator. The main difference is in air intake, different shape of the wing, circular cross section of the radome and refueling probe. The MiG 1.42 was not built.






That's only 1/2 the story John K "Jack" Northrop desing and built his first flying wing, the Avion in 1928:



After the above plane was built and tested, he built the N-1M in the 30's but because of finances, it was not finished until the beginning of 1940. The N-1M:




Both of the planes shown above were design and flown before the Horton 9, So WHO COPIED WHO? The B-2 was developed useing the older Northrop Research.

Please check your facts before you make a claim!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 08:43 AM
link   
You'd be very suprised how many "foreigner's" work for boeing, lockheed and other groups civilian and military.

Since WorldWarII, america has aquired some of the worlds best, especially from England & Germany and not just in the aeronautical field.

Many countries (non-american) have the expertise to develope stealth. But most of it comes down to money, the russians can't afford such projects and alot of other countries have no use for stealth aircraft.

Vorta



posted on Jan, 10 2005 @ 08:46 AM
link   
^^^ It means your thread is above average acording to intelgurl and shes FSME..so what she says counts...but its weird shesmajored in computer science and yet shes into UCAV development at raytheon...maybe she's involved with the automation of flight systems etc...can't be the radio link div...its mostly telecomm dudes(like moi
) up there IMHO..

The LCA has no intended stealth capabilities but its supp to be the smallest fighter there is.. plus it has a delta wing design and the lateral radar cross section is pretty minute..broadside one is quite reduced too..finally the airframe is made of undisclosed composites to reduce weight and radar signature..so a lone LCA could be a bit stealthy IMHO...maybe come up as a really tight flock o' birds but that may be being over optimistic I really don't know...as for the MCA frankly i'm indian and I'd never heard of it till ATS, and I thought myself to be a decent aircraft enthusiast...so Im literally learning about the MCA here...

Matej gimme pics of the T-50, it seems to look EXACTLY like the F-22...is it??



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Tim: The Northrop AFW (not Avion - it was the name of company) or Model 216 was not a real flying wing, because it had extensive tail surfaces. And if you want to use all history, Reimar and Walter Hortens built and flown theirs first (real) flying wing Ho-I in 1933. And what about ucrainian constructer Nieman with its flying wings KhAI in early 30s? The N-1M was built by Northrops company "Northrop Aircraft Co." (founded in 1939) and was first flown in July 1940. I could write only exactly the same:

Please check your facts before you make a claim!!!!!!!!!

www.hitechweb.szm.sk/flyingwing.htm

Daedalus3: I will post the pics of T-50 on Monday (I am not at home).



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Actually you both need to get your facts straight.

The first working flying wing aircraft were those produced by Englishman Joghn W Dunne from about 1910 such as that pictured below. So ner.



posted on Jan, 12 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Originally posted by matej
Quote:

A bit word about LCA and MCA: the LCA, developed in cooperation with france Dassault is no stealthy.

LCA was not developed with Dassault. It is not a stealth aircraft, but its extensive use of composites (per weight the most of any production aircraft.) PV1, with only roughly 40% of planned composite incorporated within the airframe itself has a stated 1/3 RCS of IAF's Mirage.


India believe, that MCA will, but now it is only the concept. My opinon is, that it wont be build. India does not have the experience for such a complex and advanced plane [the reason, why they cooperate with Dassault on LCA is, that they went into troubles and did not have solution]. They will buy the new generation fighter from Russia or will cooperate on the development [Sukhoi T-50].

There are quite a few misconceptions in your post. I reccomend checking out the LCA Thread in this forum for clarification.

Regarding the MCA, it is only in the very basic of the developmental stages. Its stated designated role is of a multi-role attack aircraft with supplemental air-to-air capability. It will replace the last tranche Mirages and Jags in IAF inventory ~2020, and will complement the Pak-FA (with its role as air-dominace), with the MKIs, Tejas, and the MRCA tender that will still be in service then.

There is no doubt the MCA project will be followed through. It has already been confirmed that it will use a variant of the cranked-delta configuration already found in the Tejas, and will comprise even more of composites than it. ADA has confirmed MCA will be a tailless design, and it has been reported that weapons will be carried internally.

But really beyond this, its unfounded speculation.


^ Here's a slightly more accurate (but still completely speculative) line-drawing from FAS taken from sketches of a rendering of the wings and rough airframe presented in a lecture by ADA scientists. The nose is pure speculation, and the artist simply attached the LCA's nose to the drawing.





[edit on 12-1-2005 by rajkhalsa2004]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
Once again from the beginning...

A bit word about LCA and MCA: the LCA, developed in cooperation with france Dassault is no stealthy. India believe, that MCA will, but now it is only the concept. My opinon is, that it wont be build. India does not have the experience for such a complex and advanced plane [the reason, why they cooperate with Dassault on LCA is, that they went into troubles and did not have solution]. They will buy the new generation fighter from Russia or will cooperate on the development [Sukhoi T-50].


India built the LCA (now Tejas) by themselves without any consultation or copying as you think


The MCA was a concept 3 years back. Now DRDO are considering building a portotype. The plan that i posted earlier was in a DRDO press release dated march 1997, when work on the MCA first began .

The MCA will replace the Mirage-2000, Jaguar, and Mig-29 of the IAF whaen it does enter service after 2012.

The proven LCA delta wing gives good performance and its aerodynamics are now well understood to justify retention, however a higher wing loading has been preferred. The fly-by-wire (FBW) controls in combination with a delta platform have certain advantages, especially in terms of high fuel storage, increased manoeuvrability, less control surfaces and low radar cross section (RCS). The instability which occurs during low-altitude penetration with significant payloads are minimised, thus the crew does not come under undue strain during long-range missions. The MCA will additionally use a radar-absorbent material (RAM) coating to reduce RCS.


The MCA will have a Maximum Take-Off Weight (MTOW) of about 18 tons. With the emphasis on stealth, the MCA will have two small, outward-canted fins and the Kaveri engines will be without afterburners to minimise IR (Infra-Red) signature. For partial compensation for lack of afterburners, the Kaveri engines on MCA will have a slightly higher dry thrust than the LCA engine. These engines will also have thrust-vectoring (TV) nozzles for manoeuvring. Thrust-vectoring engines may prove to be invaluable to MCA. Apart from letting it use shorter airstrips for landing and take-off, TV engines will prove to be of immense value in dodging incoming enemy beyond visual range (BVR) air-to-air missiles (AAMs) at extreme ranges.


A super-cruise capability of supersonically sustained flying without use of afterburners is not being sought for the MCA.

Also for stealth reasons, external conformal fuel tanks will be mounted above the wings, as is being considered for the LCA. Conformal fuel tanks increase mission range to a considerable degree while the MCA will be free to manoeuvre to the full. Stores will be carried externally, however, possibly conformally under the wing and fuselage, and will therefore increase RCS until released. This aspect is less than ideal and provision should be made for internal weapon bays to carry weaponry in missions that demand extreme stealth attributes. Additional stores should be semi-recessed under fuselage either in conformal style or laterally.

It is too early and speculative to go to details regarding avionics. An ASEA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar will be obligatory. ASEA beams are difficult to detect while they can detect hostile emissions and neutralise them with their jamming transmitter. For passive navigation and attack high-quality Forward-Looking Infra Red (FLIR) and Infra-Red Search and Track (IRST) will be necessary. Combination of ASEA radar, IRST and FLIR will ensure that MCA will remain aware of potential air-threats even while firmly focused on air-to-ground missions.

The EW (Electronic Warfare) suite should contain in addition to standard RWR (Radar Warning Receiver) and chaff/flare dispensers, towed decoys and directed-energy weapons to snap the guidance of incoming AAMs. With wide choice of guidance methods for future AAMs like active-radar, infra-red, imaging infra-red and passive homing, drastic countermeasures become obligatory.

As a bold step the MCA may be designed from outset as a naval strike-fighter with reinforced airframe and undercarriage and “arrestor-hook”. The thrust-vectoring engines by default will permit shorter take-off and landing-approach speeds. It will provide our Naval Air Arm the flexible Nuclear-delivery platforms if situation demands. MCA will in addition be able to make instantaneous post-attack assessment and may be recalled or redirected to a different target even while it is enroute to its targets. In an “all-out” nuclear scenario usually the naval stealth SSBN (Submarines, Ballistic missile armed, Nuclear powered) and Nuclear strike-fighters from mobile aircraft-carriers hold the key to massive punishing retaliation. Land-based versions of naval-MCA could also be developed with relative ease.

Indigenous capability and self-reliance has many-fold benefits. A solid foundation on our own capability can be set up. Sanctions do have only a marginal effect and can be ignored. Interestingly foreign collaborations are easy to attract if strong indigenous capability is built up as resources can be shared.

Those who negatively criticize our indigenous capability and production are either ignorant or choose to ignore the fact that after USA, India has the largest pool of scientists and qualified technical brains and personnel in the world. The United States does not suffer from such illusions. The projected transfer of “dual-use” high technology between United States and India in fields of peaceful nuclear research and space exploration through “glide path” program, indicates the deep American respect for Indian human resources, technical ability and knowledge absorption.

It is natural to harbour trust and reliance on branches of our Armed Forces along with our defence research scientists and personnel. For their part the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and associate organisations should enter into reciprocal joint-development of military hardware and software with established overseas consortiums for speedy delivery of items to our defence services.

The T-50 as you mentioned will constitute the heavy fighter category and will not affect or compete with the MCA.

IAF in 2015 :
> Light Conbat Aircraft > Tejas
> Medium combat aircraft
> Heavy fighters >> Su-30 MKI, PAK-FA (T-15?)

BTW matej, has the PAK-FA been named T-50 or what ??. have u got any pics ??



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 04:52 AM
link   
First about LCA. I am 100% sure that the Dassault cooperates in this project [I know the person from Dassault, who is working on avionics]. But it was not from the beginnig. The original plan was to build new aircraft from parts completely developed and built in India [also with electronic equipment and engine]. But they went into big problems because new generation fighter is very complex and very hard to develop. So they asked their "longyears" partner Dassault for help with some systems [not copying but cooperation!].

Waynos: Interesting finding. I did not know about this.

And Sukhoi Pak-Fa. It is named T-50. At the early definition phase it was proposed as one engined medium fighter in configuration, which is not very correctly described as "tandem triplane". It means that it has cannards, wing and tail surfaces in one line. It should be the next development step in S-54 S-55/56 linie. But this concept was abadoned mainly because one engine configuration [it is also the reason, why Yakovlev lost to MiG in MFI competition].




Then the attention was switched to modified S-37/Su-47 type fighter with standard wing, no cannards and bigger tail surfaces. The plan shows the simplified intermediate configuration.




The final [? or at least latest] configuration, which resembles F-22, also looks exactly like chinese Shenyang J-XX in 601 configuration. So it should be possible, that they cooperate in it, but now it is only my opinion.








posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
First about LCA. I am 100% sure that the Dassault cooperates in this project [I know the person from Dassault, who is working on avionics]. But it was not from the beginnig. The original plan was to build new aircraft from parts completely developed and built in India [also with electronic equipment and engine]. But they went into big problems because new generation fighter is very complex and very hard to develop. So they asked their "longyears" partner Dassault for help with some systems [not copying but cooperation!].




Yes that kind of stuff has gone one with the US as well it seems...an ATS member here alanjones I think his nick was claimed to have worked with Indian scintists who were doing avionics related testing in the US..wonder what happened to him..maybe you can u2u him...see such kind of info (dassault/alanjone) is not available online and only through contacts..

[edit on 14-1-2005 by Daedalus3]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   
The fact a company is working on the avionics does not mean they are partners in developing the plane, merely that they are contrinuting some work to it. Otherwise engine companies and avionics companies could be said to have 'collaborated' on every plane in the world.



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   
After researching a bit i found, Sexton avionique, a subsidary of Dassault is providing the LCD multi functional displays for the LCA, that's all. no big deal.

Why only dassault, US companies supplied engines for the Tejas (LCA) prototype, till India could develop their own Kaveri engine.

Now the Kaveri GTX has alredy undergone over 600 hours of supersonic flight on the LCA.

Besides, where did u get those PAK-FA pics from ??


I searched the net extensively, but all i got was a Mig I-2000.
Do you have specs of the PAK_FA(T-50) too?
The prototype was supposed to be built in 2006, going by news reports . do u have any info on that ???

[edit on 14-1-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by matej
So, shortly to answer:

tsuribito: The Horten Ho-229 was built (but not flown) in 1944


- The HortenIX/Gotha 229 began gliding trials in may 1944 and commenced flight testing in January 1945.

They did actually fly, sadly killed a pilot and were very promising aircraft although in need of much development and testing.

They also had a 'coating' designed from the outset to reduce their radar cross section. Germany had already started developing 'stealth matting' for the U-boat snorkel/radio masts.

These were the first true stealth aircraft made.

users.pandora.be...



posted on Jan, 14 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Here is another link on the T-50...

paralay.narod.ru...

It seems there another ROKAF and USAF developed jet trainer of called the T-50 Goshwak golden eagle..



posted on Jan, 20 2005 @ 12:37 PM
link   
And finally i find this :

MEDIUM COMBAT AIRCRAFT



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 04:50 AM
link   
external image

Edit: resized image/photo

[edit on 20-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 04:55 AM
link   
another....





posted on Feb, 8 2005 @ 03:55 AM
link   
since this is about non american stealth, i guess some stealthy concept's of Britain's FAOS deserve a mention


Artist's impression of a FOAS unmanned aerial vehicle after deployment from a conventional aircraft.


Artist's impression of a FOAS manned aircraft launching Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missiles (CALCM).


Options being evaluated for the FOAS Manned Aircraft is a stealthy derivative of the Eurofighter.


FOAS is a comprehensive strike system which includes a Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile, launched from a large non-penetrating aircraft, together with Manned Aircraft and Uninhabited Vehicles.


[edit on 8-2-2005 by Stealth Spy]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join