F-35 blog?

finally finished this todays , cheers
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... -benefits/

I like your work, looks pretty good. There are some things that might be good to correct or at least comment like this picture



Picture seems consistent with old (over 10 years ago) statements that F-35 has RCS of metal golf ball and F-22 has RCS of metal marble. This was before F-35 had done any RCS testing. Current statements from very official sources indicate that F-35 actually has lower RCS than F-22. B-2 might have the lowest RCS in low frequencies (HF and UHF) due to size and shape of it and because bomber has more room inside to handle long wavelengths with RAS.

WIth a reference list - very good!

I enjoyed the read - good work

Nice blog, lots of detail there.

Can I put in a request for a post on the value of situational awareness? This probably goes for Dragon's youtube channel as well.

Situational awareness was the key for me when it came to "getting" the F-35. I have a history background, and grew up reading everything I could on military history, especially the air war in WWI and WWII. When I started really looking into the F-35 program a few years back, a lot of the technical side of things required some major boning up on (with no professional background in this, figuring out some of the terms at first was daunting). But the big conceptual piece that made everything click into place was the power of information gathering, data-links, off-board targeting, and the whole "first-look/first-kill" rationale.

I know most of the veteran posters and professional here know this like the back of their hand; it's self evident for them. It clicked into place for me, because it meshed perfectly with what I'd read growing up (Boelcke's "Dicta" in WW I, how the U.S. beat the Zero in WW II by not playing the Zero's game, the importance of the AIMVAL/ACEVAL exercises, etc). It sold me on the F-35, because everything the "pro-F-35" crowd was saying was backed up by historical experience. It also placed the program delays and overruns in context (next to the teething troubles of all the teen-series fighters, the F-35 delays haven't been all that surprising, or serious).

Continuing to explain the kinematics and electronics by themselves are important, because there's a huge amount of wrong out there. But it seems to me that these arguments will only get so far with the average layman who doesn't have any context with which to judge what actually matters in air combat.

We need a clear, easy to comprehend, counter-narrative that educates the layman about what actual matters in a fight in the air. Something that actually explains how big of a deal sensor fusion and "information is life" thinking really is.

I like your work, looks pretty good. There are some things that might be good to correct or at least comment like this picture



Picture seems consistent with old (over 10 years ago) statements that F-35 has RCS of metal golf ball and F-22 has RCS of metal marble. This was before F-35 had done any RCS testing. Current statements from very official sources indicate that F-35 actually has lower RCS than F-22.

fixed , thanks hornet

B-2 might have the lowest RCS in low frequencies (HF and UHF) due to size and shape of it and because bomber has more room inside to handle long wavelengths with RAS.

I agree , but at the moment i dont have the value of others aircraft at long wavelength so i have to left that part out

WIth a reference list - very good!

I enjoyed the read - good work

Iam really glad that you do , cheers

Nice blog, lots of detail there.

Can I put in a request for a post on the value of situational awareness? This probably goes for Dragon's youtube channel as well.

Situational awareness was the key for me when it came to "getting" the F-35. I have a history background, and grew up reading everything I could on military history, especially the air war in WWI and WWII. When I started really looking into the F-35 program a few years back, a lot of the technical side of things required some major boning up on (with no professional background in this, figuring out some of the terms at first was daunting). But the big conceptual piece that made everything click into place was the power of information gathering, data-links, off-board targeting, and the whole "first-look/first-kill" rationale.

I know most of the veteran posters and professional here know this like the back of their hand; it's self evident for them. It clicked into place for me, because it meshed perfectly with what I'd read growing up (Boelcke's "Dicta" in WW I, how the U.S. beat the Zero in WW II by not playing the Zero's game, the importance of the AIMVAL/ACEVAL exercises, etc). It sold me on the F-35, because everything the "pro-F-35" crowd was saying was backed up by historical experience. It also placed the program delays and overruns in context (next to the teething troubles of all the teen-series fighters, the F-35 delays haven't been all that surprising, or serious).

Continuing to explain the kinematics and electronics by themselves are important, because there's a huge amount of wrong out there. But it seems to me that these arguments will only get so far with the average layman who doesn't have any context with which to judge what actually matters in air combat.

We need a clear, easy to comprehend, counter-narrative that educates the layman about what actual matters in a fight in the air. Something that actually explains how big of a deal sensor fusion and "information is life" thinking really is.

I will write a post about situation awareness in the future , I didnt write it at the start because without basics knowledge about how RWR , Radar , infrared sensor, stealth work , it really hard to explain to people why some aircraft has more situation awareness than the others and so on , many people still think that anything get within 400 km from s-400 will be shoot down instantly or that a Su-35 can carry a big jammer to compensate for it's signature .

The main problem i get at the moment is iam not quite sure whether i should group some post together or make them separate , for example : iam not sure wherther i should add the post about Infrared reduction in the post about stealth or not , may be it would be better be included in the future post about IRST sensor ?

Just finished a new post , hope you guys like it
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... asure-ecm/

Just finished a new post , hope you guys like it
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... asure-ecm/

A great read yet again. I'm wondering about the formula here though:

ERPs = Effective radiated power of radar
ERPj =Effective radiated power of jammer
G = Antenna gain
RCS = Target radar cross section

Looks very interesting, unfortunately the listed variables are exactly the ones that are deductible. But what are variables F and R? What are the constants 103, 32, 40, 20, etc, where do they come from? Also the logarithms are to the default base of 10 right?

It would probably be easier to look it up ourselves, but Which of the references is the source of this?

Looks very interesting, unfortunately the listed variables are exactly the ones that are deductible. But what are variables F and R? What are the constants 103, 32, 40, 20, etc, where do they come from? Also the logarithms are to the default base of 10 right?

I can answer
R = range
F= frequency
all constant are from radar equation

Looks very interesting, unfortunately the listed variables are exactly the ones that are deductible. But what are variables F and R? What are the constants 103, 32, 40, 20, etc, where do they come from? Also the logarithms are to the default base of 10 right?

It would probably be easier to look it up ourselves, but Which of the references is the source of this?

Eloise have already explained the variable
these numbers come from free space attenuation formula , and yes logarithms are to the default base of 10
reference come from here

Thanks to both of you!

Trying to learn about the basics of radars from different sources. Hard to find good material on the subject. Some manuals like this give basic insight, but most of the layman's books on the subject seem old and expensivce.

Thanks to both of you!

Trying to learn about the basics of radars from different sources. Hard to find good material on the subject. Some manuals like this give basic insight, but most of the layman's books on the subject seem old and expensivce.

You are welcome

Out of curiosity , how well your blog doing in term of traffic ?

Out of curiosity , how well your blog doing in term of traffic ?

Not many visitors yet

AwEsOmE!!! Stay objective garrya. It is a treasure trove of cool information. Thank you.