Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 96 of 96 FirstFirst ... 46869293949596
Results 2,851 to 2,863 of 2863

Thread: Rafale news & discussion part XVI

  1. #2851
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,995
    Quote Originally Posted by FBW View Post
    I provided you with everything you need to understand the topic. There is no magic, no unknown in flight control. You are the one that needs to provide counter evidence that the Rafale has a magical control of yaw when the vertical stab is blocked in high AoA, it is exactly that simple. If you can't, (which you cant't) then you'll get why the F-16, Rafale, and Gripen are AoA limited to around 30 degrees operationally. Testing is a different matter as they have sufficient margin of recovery.

    Please, if you are so confident, show me a study where a single vertical tail ( without tvc) can operate at very high alpha, with full control. I've provided you with articles in this and the Gripen thread that show they can't, period.
    if your faith brings to you the need to speak about magic all the time, that's your problem.... You have operational aircraft that operate safely without any vertical tail at all, and without TVC either, like the B-2. They don't fall from the sky at any windshear, any pitch up, or other variation in their flight (or load for that matter)... You are the one to claim you know why the value chosen is exactly that one... you have to prove it. I say they tested the thing at almost 3 times that value without departing controlled flight (fact), so why have they chosen to stay at 30, and not 35, or 28 or any other value, I don't know. How am I supposed to provide data to prove that "we don't have the data relevant to the reasons of that particular choice"? You state that YOU KNOW WHY, so YOU ARE TEH ONE HAVING TO PROVIDE VALID DATA TO SHOW IT.. as long as you don't have data related to that particular decision on that particular aircraft, all you can put forward, as you did until now, are facts that, while interesting in their own right, are irrelevant to this discussion

  2. #2852
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,995
    Quote Originally Posted by Yama View Post
    I don't understand what this discussion is about anymore (if I ever did). Surely it is obvious to any common sense person that AoA limitations are not put there just for the heck of it? In some cases there might be a 'soft limit' which can be exceeded if a situation demands but even that has a rationale behind it.
    That's what several of us have been saying all the time: they had their reasons, but up to now, nobody could bring solid information bout these reasons.. and we have a bunch of guys who are all over the place claiming "because it couldn't go any further" posting explanations about other types of aircraft none of which uses the same layout/FCS as the one we talk about

  3. #2853
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,053
    Minister of defence JY Le Drian announced start of first F4 standard. More netcentric, new missiles, sensors and engine evolution.

  4. #2854
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,212
    Too cool, I repeat. I have given u the explanation, then I gave links in case some still doubted why. The B-2 example proves my point. Flying wings use split ailerons in some cases. And no, they cannot fly at a high AoA at all due to yaw control as wing blocks aileron effectiveness. Also why flying wings are subsonic.

    I did provide valid data, i'm sorry if you don't understand the rationale. There is nothing special about the Rafale's control surfaces. Every aircraft will suffer decreased pitch and yaw if flow is disrupted. Instead of yelling in caps, show me how the tail provides lateral stability when blocked, I provided enough visually and in actual reports that single tails suffer decreased yaw control at high AoA. As for why the Rafale was tested at an AoA three times the FCS limit, I explained that too. Look back, a clean airframe can recover from that type of departure. Once loaded (especially with an asymmetric load) it would be dangerous to risk departure in combat. The FCS is about carefree handling so the pilot does not have to worry about exceeding the departure limits at a variety of weights and with various stores.

    Prove me wrong or stop whining because you feel I'm attacking your beloved Rafale. I'm actually not, the layout has advantages.... and disadvantages just like every other control configuration.. Shocking I know.
    Last edited by FBW; 22nd March 2017 at 20:58.

  5. #2855
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    That's what several of us have been saying all the time: they had their reasons, but up to now, nobody could bring solid information bout these reasons..
    It is hard to fathom what these reasons could be other than higher aoa's would compromise safety.

  6. #2856
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3,024
    Quote Originally Posted by Yama View Post
    I don't understand what this discussion is about anymore (if I ever did). Surely it is obvious to any common sense person that AoA limitations are not put there just for the heck of it? In some cases there might be a 'soft limit' which can be exceeded if a situation demands but even that has a rationale behind it.
    Yes, that is essentially their argument.

    Because nobody can definitively prove that the Rafale's AoA limit is there for a reason, as is the case for every other fighter, it must just be a totally arbitrary limit.

    The same logic would mean that the Rafale can fly faster than its top speed, carry more than its max load, etc etc, because maybe those are all just totally arbitrary limits that are imposed for no real reason.

  7. #2857
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,053

  8. #2858
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    Early days but is the expectation that all aircraft will be upgraded to F4 or just new build? Given engine modifications it could become a somewhat costly exercise to bring all up to F4 standard.

    It talks about missiles, is this a MICA replacement or better meteor suppprt and perhaps additional third nation missile requirements?

  9. #2859
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,354
    The point is that tommorrow B-TX - a trainer - would probably have a wider flight maneuvering envelope than a today Rafale. EoA

  10. #2860
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Ozair View Post
    Early days but is the expectation that all aircraft will be upgraded to F4 or just new build? Given engine modifications it could become a somewhat costly exercise to bring all up to F4 standard.

    It talks about missiles, is this a MICA replacement or better meteor suppprt and perhaps additional third nation missile requirements?
    Missiles : highly probably mica ng. Work on mica ng already financed a year or two ago.

    As it is F4 standard and not MLU, block will be retrofittable. Which do not mean every airplane engines will be changed (think like AESA) but new ones would be fitted with. Older engines would be replaced little by little... And air intakes would not allow more than 8.2/8.3 T thrust afaik.

  11. #2861
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    The point is that tommorrow B-TX - a trainer - would probably have a wider flight maneuvering envelope than a today Rafale. EoA
    Blah blah.........

  12. #2862
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,354
    No, it's true. Open you eyes.

  13. #2863
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,045
    no, not tomorrow, perhaps the day when mach 2 supercruise is to be expected,
    but that day is not tomorrow
    the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept.
    -Robert L Shaw

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 8 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 8 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES