Gigantic aircraft for the next generation

Is the next generation of aircraft’s going to be much more bigger? I heard that this is the trend

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Likely, the NGAD is going to be nearly the same size as the B-21.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What happened to being worried about radar cross section? Is stealth tech really that advanced now?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >What happened to being worried about radar cross section?
        The size of the airframe doesn't dictate its RCS: SHAPE does. Which is why a B-2 has the RCS of a small moth. Shape, shape, shape, materials, and WAAAAAYYYYY down is size. The F-22 could've been bigger, but the hardened shelters designed for the F-15 limited them to a design with similar external dimensions of the F-15.
        >Is stealth tech really that advanced now?
        It has been since the BQB, and Tacit Blue.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >What happened to being worried about radar cross section?
        Counterintuitively having a larger aircraft lets you get a lower RCS in more frequency bands. If your surface feature is near 1x the wavelength it kinda gets ignored. For some radar bands an entire F-35's wing is 1x wavelength. It's weird, RF is magic.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This is overall correct, though, with the F-35 they use carbon nanotube (CNT) fiber mat RAM which is supposed to cover ULF to EHF. I'll just dump my pasta:

          The F-35 is fully composite, with CNT RAM baked into the composite body panels. Along with the Z13 top coat that's more for IR reduction, though, does reduce the RSC further by -10dBs.

          >The F-35 also has excellent RAM bonded to the composite panels, making it extremely difficult to detect - if not impossible.
          >The composite absorbs radar in a frequency range from about 0.10 Megahertz to about 60 Gigahertz. The CNT-infused fiber material forms a first layer that reduces radar reflectance and a second layer that dissipates the energy of the radar.
          >Radar absorbing composite materials of the present invention are particularly effective, for example, in the L- through K-band as described herein further below.
          https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100271253

          https://www.ineffableisland.com/2010/06/lockheed-martin-discloses-carbon.html
          https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=197759
          https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/136859-advanced-in-ram-make-low-frequency-radar-much-less-effective-in-future
          https://theaviationist.com/2020/07/05/new-and-old-f-35-coatings-compared-in-recent-photo-of-two-italian-lightning-ii-jets/
          https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=53014

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >0.1 MHz = 2.997 km wavelength
            Yeah it’s not getting detected at that end of the spectrum lol

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >bombers getting smaller
    >fighters get larger
    Why is this? Serious question

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      convergent evolution

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because they increasingly do the same job, lob bvr payloads into enemy territory and head back.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I just want Nausicaa/Castle In The Sky kino with tiny fighter planes and leviathan airships

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I think you should be shot for proposing this abomination, flying machines should be beautiful and anything else is heresy!

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          2012 post

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because these are “multirole fighters” aka fighter bombers, and those are “strategic stealth bombers” aka small and carry nukes

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why is the F-22 so much bigger than the F-35?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      F22 is about average sized for a twin engined air superior fighter...F15 is approx the same size. F35 is similar to the F16 in size.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    SEX with Kaan

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Bigger, for more stealth

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I knew the Kaan was big when I learned it was using F110s for engines but it is mogging the F-22 in size! I'm kinda pissed.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    now how big is mighty CHYNA dagon in comparison

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Love this guy's work. Seems like plausibly deniable satire.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        kek. If the official copeganda were as bollywoody I would actually willingly spread it for the entertainment factor alone

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        dumb question, but how fricked would a a CBG be if a hostile Type59 suddenly appeared on the flight deck?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          push it off the deck?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Will a carrier would have a security department with an armoury, maybe containing at least some kind of anti-tank weapon

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I used to wonder how stealth fighters like the F-22 and and F-35 keep stealthy with their big radar sets in the nose? Because the radome obviously has to pass radar signals for the radar to work. The answer is — they just have it fixed in place pointing upwards. It sacrifices radar scanning coverage of a steerable radar for the sake of making sure radars hitting it from below won’t get reflected back to the sender. Furthermore they encase the actual antenna array in a thick RAM foam / rubber to hide all the metal and cables around and behind the unit. That means an F-35 can’t do look-down radar scans like many 4th gens can — and it’s not supposed to, ie, the pilots are instructed NOT to point the non-stealth nose down. But it COULD mean that a plane like an AWACS for example flying at a higher altitude could possibly pick it up, depending on the frequency being used.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >F-35 can’t do look-down radar scans
      I wonder how good thier optical tech is. That's the end game right? Machine assisted "passive" detection via just 'aving a look? I read somewhere they were working on that and they will be adding more cameras to the body of the plane in the future.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I sometimes wonder if lidar or camera is more effective in bad sight, rain, clouds, fog...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      One of the F-35s selling points--sensor fusion--includes the ability to make really good SAR images of ground targets. So, I doubt that they're unable to perform look-down.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      One of the F-35s selling points--sensor fusion--includes the ability to make really good SAR images of ground targets. So, I doubt that they're unable to perform look-down.

      This anon is right. The AN/APG-81 is still capable of look-down-shoot-down.
      https://sustainability.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/eo/documents/webt/F-35_Mission_Systems_Design_Development_and_Verification.pdf

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Furthermore, the F-35 uses something called focused SAR, which doesn't degrade the resolution of the SAR image with distance. Rumor is 4" resolution at 80nmi+.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >F-35 can’t do look-down radar scans
      What are you talking about, you can steer the beam almost 90 degrees off antenna boresight at the expense of making it wider and increasing sidelobes, but you don't need high performance when the target you're overflying is 20km away at worst. This is in fact better than many mechanical scanning gimbals even if you include the fixed tilt angle, they're limited to around 60 degrees up and down. The only area where a fixed AESA behaves worse than mechanical are long range engagements past 30-45 degrees off boresight, the beam width increases so the gain decreases. That's why some AESA designs add mechanical steering, either with a 2 axis gimbal or rotation along the roll axis

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It can still look down you dingus, that's the whole point of AESA radars, it can angle the beam.
      It can't look down at targets that are relatively close, but at that point the optical targeting covers it.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Strike aircraft may start to move towards the rather specific glide bomb throw mission that we see today constantly in Syria and Ukraine. So,
    - a lot of power (afterburners), big wing and possibly a custom launch bay. Single seat.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Poor peasant nations that can’t afford nice things forced to use ‘50s tactics mean that future planes will be like that
      Nah.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is the next generation of aircraft’s going to be much more bigger? I heard that this is the trend

    Yes because you need to carry your weapons inside for stealth.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >moron comparing twin engine heavy fighters to 1 light fighters

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >KAAN
    How long until it gets pulverized in a crash?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      When it becomes clear it is entirely built out of cardboard like everything Turkshit.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    F-16 is smol and cute.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      f-16 is lolli maybe lollibaba considering age
      f-35 is oppai lolli

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Can't miniaturize onboard laser weapons to be small enough so you gotta build the plane around the zipzaps.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the kaan we saw on the video is nowhere near this big not sure why people keep posting this rendering as true

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *