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.
. I honestly dont know where your source got this from but it is untrue. TVC nozzles do not reduce RCS, in general they tend to add to it or at the very, very best make little difference. It's extremely difficult not to have a moving/translating 2D/3D nozzle give off scintillating radar returns unless slathered in RAM, and that is currently extremely difficult. It is true that a properly designed TVC nozzle can reduce IR signatures but again only if done carefully and on the proviso that disciplined flying tactics are employed.
The WS-10G will be fitted with thrust vector controlled (TVC) nozzles to decrease radar cross section (RCS)....
Originally posted by kondor
...Stealth cancels all this years of development in radars and long range missiles. No one can find the adversary with radar. ...
. I did not have an issue with kondor making the statement and he at least provided a link. What I have an issue with is that when taken out of context by itself it erroneously implies that TVC's reduce radar returns and that is simply untrue. I can see that he probably believes that he has found some evidence supporting this idea but I would put it to him and you that the statement in the airforce-technology article is simply incorrect. In fact my suspicion that it was simply lifted from a Chinese site which will no doubt put a pro spin on it, is heightened by the fact that most of the specification measurements are in metric including altitude and aircraft dimensions. This is not accepted standard practice in either the US armed services or their suppliers. In fact measurements of altitude under international convention are in feet, NOT meters except in you guessed it, China and Russia. Further there are some slight grammatical errors that a person speaking and in particular writing UK or US based English would be unlikely to make, that lead me to believe that the author of the airforce-technology article did not in fact author but merely copy/pasted it. And therefore did not check the factual accuracy of the stated claims.
...The WS-10G will be fitted with thrust vector controlled (TVC) nozzles to decrease radar cross section (RCS)...
Originally posted by ZIVONIC
reply to post by kondor
I wouldn't count on that testimony, I'm sure I've seen a picture floating around of a T-38 with a radar lock on the F-22. Please correct me if I'm wrong on the details.
Everyone and their brother wants TVC on their aircraft (at least the fan-boys do ), but unless it has the correct engine layout, the only improvement you can get out of it is an AOA increase, and that comes with a cost/maintenance increase.
Stealth will NOT put us in a WVR only situation, but engagement ranges will decrease obviously, thus increases the chances of a WVR engagement.edit on 20/6/11 by ZIVONIC because: added comment
Originally posted by ZIVONIC
reply to post by waynos
You cannot see it very easily on the model, here is a clear picture of the vertical stabilizer. The nozzles either need to be moved back past the "tail boom", or spread out for 2D TVC to work. I'm not sure 3D is even possible. Thus discrediting Eurofighters claim that TVC can be equipped without any body modification, but whatever.
reply to post by kondor
Understandable kondor, interesting read on the T-38, do you have an explanation for the Rafale's shoot down or the EA-18 with an AIM 120 kill against the F-22.edit on 21/6/11 by ZIVONIC because: added comments