[QUOTE=antonius123;2750775]Where is the hell in the world "the angularity" is th e established rule for STEALTH?

You only drag your own false thinking than fact. I dont either see any sawtooth on the surface of F-22's tail fin and wings, nor find any rule in stealth world that require sawtooth on the plate surface[/QUOTE ] dude those angularity creates sharp points which help in scattering of radar wa ves see this In a traditional wing diffraction may occur in the places I mentioned as well as the wing tips. The sharp edges you see on stealth aircraft such as the B-2 is to direct energy from that one point. Like this: [IMG]http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/5965/b2edgediffract.jpg[/IMG] F22 doent need saw tooth as it has angular wings & tail fins .ok [QUOTE=antonius123;2750775] LLOLZ your ridiculous claim without any existing EVIDENCE you can bring except a nother empty claim - is obviously WET DREAM.[/QUOTE] Like i said earliear u r allergic to knowledge :lol: u dont want to learn anythi ng instead posting craps to attract attention . If u want to attract attention join Disney forum where they would thank u for ur stupid & clueless posts :D [QUOTE=antonius123;2750805]LLOLLZ i never claim as a Dr/US Pilot/Russion Aviatio n Engineer etc, but I could explain and bring solid evidence.[/QUOTE] what di^K hair evidence u r giving we all can see :lol: llollz give me ur email id i would give u soft copy of my Dr certificate & also i have good psychiatric specialist as my friend if u want i can give u his name if u want to check ur brain as it looks brainless :D

[QUOTE=Martian;23939] 1. The J-20 Mighty Dragon does not need a saw-tooth design at the rear of the ca nard, because the J-20 canard is made of composite material, shaped to deflect r adar away from transmitter, RAM-coated (which Rafale lacks), and the canard-fuse lage intersection is specifically designed to deflect radar. In conclusion, the J-20 canard is very stealthy. The claim that the J-20 canard gap is a corner reflector is not true. Go ahead a nd try to draw a ray trace diagram to show a corner reflector. You cannot. It is a surface discontinuity as a tiny radar source. This kind of surface discontinu ity is also seen in the T-50/Pak-Fa's airfoil gap and main wing control surfaces for the F-22, J-20, and T-50/Pak-Fa. In my opinion, the Rafale canard design is clearly inferior. The Rafale built a thick structure to avoid a continuity gap. The round Rafale nose (which is not s haped) and the attendant large canard bridge are terrible for stealth. I think t hey designed it this way for structural integrity. [I'll label the problems on t he Rafale later tonight when I return]

2. J-20 slightly-rounded LERX is a minor criticism. It can be easily fixed. It i s trivial. 3. The third point about the angle of the J-20's wings is without merit. I have already written a post to compare the planform alignment of the J-20, F-22, and T-50/Pak-Fa. It is silly to argue for more planform alignment angles on the J-20 . The shape of the main wings is designed to match the aerodynamics of an aircraft . The J-20 has canards and its wing shape is the most appropriate aerodynamicall y for the aircraft. The guiding design principle is "form follows function" and not why don't you copy design features from other planes. Off-topic: Nice try Mr. Somnath. However, this nit-picking won't work. You need to find a major flaw to grab people's attention. The only major flaw on the J-20 is the round engine nozzles. The J-20 engine nozzles are serrated like the F-35 , but they are clearly not as stealthy (in both radar and infrared wavelengths) as the F-22.

Mr. Somnath picked a terrible example in the French Rafale when he attempted to illustrate a perceived deficiency in the J-20 Mighty Dragon canard design. The F rench Rafale is not to be emulated in any way in the design of a 5th generation stealth fighter. The round shielding to hide the canard gap is far less stealthy than the J-20 canard's elegant back-end to deflect radar.

Somnath999, much like me, we both knows a little bit but not enough about RADAR deflection or Stealth. That is why I am reading and learning from Martian. His a rgument is sound, coherent and logical. His comment about the round exhaust of t he J20 is quite true but much like J10, J20 is an evolving design. The final var iant may be a mean monster. I am impressed, India LCA design has not changed a b it from the original 35 years ago. But you are something. You took an argument, twisted the info by selectively arg uing or pointing out facts that is basically worth NOTHING. TELL ME, are you seriously suggesting to me that the 4th gen. RAFALE is equal or better than a China 5th generation fighter J20? Here is my observation and I declared I am not a ROCKET SCIENTIST. While you use the saw tooth on the back of the canards of a RAFALE to support yo ur argument, the underbelly, the windtips of the RAFALE is a total DISASTER comi ng to stealthiness. It will even be worse when the RAFALE is fully armed? OMG! You equal the wingtip of a J20 to that of a Mirage 2000. That tells me some thing, Nationalistic Indians like you refuse to believe that the Chinese Militar y Industries is 20 years ahead of India today and try to belittle China enthusia sts like us by bring out irrelevant arguments. At Indian Forums, Indian nationalistic posters says the darndest things: Here are some example: India LCA can easily beat a F22 RAPTOR, Indian experts claimed 5~6 years ago in

Bharat Rakshak, huh! No problem, only the screws were loosen when the Kaveri Test failed, Huh! Now someone from there comes here and claimed the IMPORTED RAFALE can beat every aircraft in the China Air Forces. Huh!

[QUOTE=Chinese Century;23960] and who do u quote? indian propaganda media!! ur an obvious troll. indian air force is absolutely no match for the PLA air force. J-10B can f**k up anything in the indian air force.[/QUOTE]

lllolllz ..stop whining my boy why dont u educate urselves properly u can learn something about rafale:D http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/163714-rafales-mini-encylopedia-itsfanboyz.html one funny thing is even chinese propanganda media is also claiming this http://i44.tinypic.com/vg545f.png http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/167102-china-test-its-j-10-fightersnear-borders-india-11.html

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] For one who debates in this FORUM, IMO uneducated you are extremely rude and arr ogant. There is NO NEED for you to issue any CHALLENGES if you have the FACTS an d NUMBERS to back your arguments.[/QUOTE] no i am not rude & nor i am arrogant ,u dont know how ur great friend martian re acted in defence.pk about this saga .He invaded all threads in that forum with h is stupid biased post & started maligning me that how dare Dr somnath compare th at ugly rafale with J10 .So i got angry & i replied him in his manner. Then he r ealised his blunder & edited his post & deleted that Ugly rafale word. & now he became innocent but i didnt edit my post like him & for that reason ,i look arro gant.I forgot to photosnip his posts orelse i would have shown u that.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] We are not exactly IDIOTS and IMHO you are NOT exactly the expert we wish you w ere or pretend to be. Mind you, this is not the Bharat Rakshak s Forum for your in

formation. And we particularly I am not IMPRESSED by your claims that NONE of th e present 4th or 4.5th Gen Chinese Fighters can challenged your coming IAF ACQUI SITION by 2015 onward. IMO by then the new RULER of the SKY in ASIA is without a ny doubt the 5th Generation J20 or other 5th or 6th Gen fighter in secret develo pment at this moment. The news about Pakistan acquisition of 36 of the JF20 or J 10B is already making many inside India having SLEEPLESS nights.[/QUOTE] llollz 1st of all i see u have comprehension problems perhaps as i said no 4th o r 4.5 gen fighters cannot be compared to rafale but not to coming IAF ACQUISITI ON by 2015 onwards as both have different meanings .& i am right about that. PLZ dont bring J20 in eqn here .& who would get sleepless nights u & all would s ee when india acquires rafale & pakfa.OK

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] There is NO DOUBT the Rafale is an impressive and versatile fighting machine oth erwise the Chinese would not have send their evaluation team to closely examine it many of years ago. And finally despites all the rumors over the net about the sales of Rafale to PLAAF, China give it a PASS. WHY? The answer may be found inside China Wind Tunnel. They have most probably conduc ted their studies all its aerodynamics. The J10 is an evolving design and by 201 6, a new stealth variant possibly with a more powerful Chinese designed FADEC tu rbofan may probably be on displayed for EXPORT.[/QUOTE] GOOD then u must know that i am right what i said in bold blue letters

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Next what happen to your JF-17 Thunder and Raptor KILLER, the LCA, I read so muc h about from your Indian Forum 5 years ago? According to the Indians Posters the n, it is going to be capable and indigenous, for a moment I thought then it can probably shoot down the MOON. With that INDIA CERTAINLY DOES NOT NEED any Rafale or EF2000. LCA is sufficed.[/QUOTE] llolllz as usual expected low grade chinese mentality thinking unnecessarily dra gging LCA into every debate for no reason.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Next, IMO your argument FLAWED! Like you say MOST UNFORTUNATELY you cannot prove this IMPORTED Mica missile has a range of 80 km as you claimed. [/QUOTE] LOOLLZ i had plz check http://spsaviation.net/exclusive/?id=9&h=MICA-missile-for-upgraded-Mirage-2000 [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] You Indian are FANTASTICS are there many mountains instead of molehills inside I ndia.[/QUOTE] LLOOLLZ then where the F^^^ are the himalayas mountain :lol: & on top of it u ca ll us fantastics without urself knowing proper facts :rofl: [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Today the general consensus among the MILITARY CIRCLES is that the latest PL12D has a longer range than the MICA missile e.g. the USA Military always thought th at the DF21 has only a range of 1500 km until he found out from the Chinese it i s 2500 km. Now they have to move their Aircraft Carriers 1000 km further. You qu ote Hui Tong website and he is considered as conservative and he is very careful

about his number unlike Pinko.[/QUOTE] llollz when did pl 12d got tested that they would say it's longer range than mic a missile ,infact god knows what happened to the status of pl 12 b program as we only saw a pics of it in j11 ,then no new news on it we have seen yet.Only pl 12A is inducted & it's range is 60-70km it is itself claimed by it's manufacturer ,it c ould have as best 80km max range no way it's 100km. meanwhile rafale is going to ramjet powered Meteor missile stated to have range greater than 120km [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] To me, you are just another NATIONALISTIC Indian poster who is basically what Ch inese named as PAPER WARRIOR. Plenty of made believe facts that cannot be verifi ed esp. the Chinese side because they are indeed very discrete about their R&D o r their information. The transparency with the J20 surprises many, me included. That may perhaps suggested they have yet other SUPER DESIGNS being tested right now in their sleeves.[/QUOTE] LOLLLZ Infact same to me, u look just another fanboyic clueless chinese poster w ho doent even know what crap he is posting & on top of it pretends as if he know s everything. Pathetic

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] 1. INDIA did not CHOOSE the Dassault Rafale because of the so-called SPECTRA EW suite TECHNOLOGY. Rafale was CHOOSEN because it was the CHEAPEST TENDER. Whether others have this equivalent is a 1 million dollar questions and off course all manufacturers claimed their products are better than the rest. The others DON'T GIVE A DAMN. No AIR FORCE in the WORLD except FRANCE is ordering them and NOW th e Indian bit the bait. If the SPECTRA EW suite is so INVINCIBLE like you says th en why didn t the technical evaluators from the other AIR FORCES especially the Si ngapore Air Force known for its high standard CHOSE it. SO stop KIDDING OURSELVE S.[/QUOTE] wohoooo...OMG (facepalm) really my prediction about you from ur earliear post wa s totally right Ur totally a clueless poster who doesnt even know what crap he is posting & on top of it pretends as if he knows everything.:lol:. NO plane is selected on a basis of single criteria like only that of SPECTRA EW suite TECHNOLOGY that u posted if that the case then it wouldnt have taken 5- yr s to evaluate MMRCA process & we would have declared Rafale winner within 1yr if that was the case that u mentioned, but infact all the factors are included in evaluation process & rafale was the best contender

which passed all the criteria briliantly as compare to all it's competitors. The price factor is an excuse given by Indian government to the EF typhoon conso rtium so that not to sour relationships with their partner states infact if u w ant to know the Top 10 reasons why india chose rafale then read this thread post ed by me if u have free time . http://www.indiandefence.com/forums/f7/top-10-reasons-why-india-made-right-choic e-selecting-rafale-winner-14597/ plz dont read any biased/bribed indian or western author article which produces fake arguments why india chose rafale just to malign that great plane & praise that Typhoon which dont have any operational features like operational AESA radar & operational Air to ground ALCM missile c apabilty like that of rafale. Infact u better read this as u were mentioning that singapore rejected it & no c ountry is interested in it .But the fact is it is totally baseless as it got proven from this leaked switzerland report wher e rafale clearly prevailed over it's competitors. plz read this [B][U][SIZE="6"][COLOR="red"]XIV)SWITZERLAND, LEAKED EVALUATION REPORT:[/COLOR][ /SIZE][/U][/B] [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]I) NWA PHASE I 2008 ANALYSIS WITH REAL FLIGHT TRIAL S:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/B] [IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MqscY-57pgM/Tzlj8zFG8dI/AAAAAAAACZA/8Sdu3jyFVrw/s 1600/Swiss_eval_NWA1.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-E2bVIJBstFw/TziCzCeyzdI/AAAAAAAACYM/ATw0IaCWB4g/s 1600/Swiss_eval_NWA1_appreciations.png[/IMG] [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]II)NWA PHASE II 2009 ANALYSIS WITH REAL FLIGHT TRIA LS:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/B] [IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1xIGy5FbmLQ/Tzlj_IwRlrI/AAAAAAAACZI/-2ZUwLXklKE/s 1600/Swiss_eval_NWA2.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Lj-Vmw8lg4c/TzlkELnzBNI/AAAAAAAACZY/ZkHZyOWxe3A/s 1600/Swiss_eval_NWA2_appreciations.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-u9A1B1CJxwY/TziFDQ6i_YI/AAAAAAAACYw/Zw1pk2MaDoQ/s 1600/Swiss_eval_AP1.png[/IMG] It is worth noting that the Air Policing mission, although important, is a quite low risk mission. In more challenging Air to Air task such as OCA or DCA missio ns where the target can be highly dangerous and where ECM/RCS become of primary relevance, the Rafale seems to prevail with a more comfortable margin. http://kovy.free.fr/temp/rafale/pdf/12332.pdf http://lignesdedefense.blogs.ouest-france.fr/files/rapport%20suisse.pdf http://rafalenews.blogspot.in/2012/02/switzerland-evaluation-report-quick.html Not only that brazil which had rejected rafale earliear is now heavily intereste d in acquiring rafale & had taken a report of rafale performance report from ind ia's MMRCA evaluators.Same can also be said for UAE

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] 2. At the time of introduction says 2015~2018, Indian French made MICA may be re ndered useless by PL21D with >100 km range or the rumored PL2X >120 km.[/QUOTE] LLLOLLLZ by that time Meteor would have been integrated on it & MICA IR by defac to would be subordinate or reduced to IR missile only on rafale.& spectra could easily take care of all chinese air to air missiles .plz educate urselves on SP ECTRA [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]SPECTRA A DIGITAL REVOLUTION:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/B ] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/SPECTRACOMPONENTS .jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/SPECTRAADIGITALRE VOLUTION.jpg[/IMG] http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/AUTRES_DOCS/Fox _three/Fox_Three_nr_1.pdf

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] 3. One thing for sure, based on the present state of its manufacturing industry, India can always depend on Europe or Russia for its latest AIR FORCE acquisitio n as long India has the CASH to purchase them. India wants a joint venture, NO P ROBLEM, India can provides the software for its own AIR FORCE and the Made in In dia tyres. Main Airframe structures, NO WAY, India does have any suitable HPF ma chine.[/QUOTE] LLLOLLLZ u should introspect urselves that despite such a great chest thumping b y china on it's copycat aeroindustry ,not a single country is buying any military jet from it excluding that bankrupt & fore ign aid dependent Pakistan whose country's people depend upon foreign aid for th eir survival :rofl:.But compare to that Indian aero industry has managed to be better export performer as compare to china just check the customers of DHRUV he licopter.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] 4. Let me comment on your optimistic collaboration with Russia on the so-called KS 100 novator 200-300 km AWACS killer. Against 3rd world nations like camel rid ing nations e.g. Libya, Afghanistan it may work wonderfully well but if you are using that against Super Powers e.g. USA or PRC, STOP WASTING our time. Notice C hina did not even bother to response to India provocations. IMO None of those wi ll survive the first onslaught. Another thing, RUSSIA will never SELL its milita ry CORE technology to any nations including INDIA. It is just ORDINARY Indians Pi pe Dreams.[/QUOTE] lllollzz if that the case then PAkistan is also a 3rd world nation & it's Airfor ce going to have KJ2000 AWACS :lol: Ur caught in ur own word trap. Thats not all like all typical chinese fanboys u have self proclaimed urselves as superpower which dont know how western airforces fight & train even Pakistan AF has more western airforce exposure than u just having similiar kind of weapon s wont

make u a superpower like that of western airforces.Meanwhile IAF has much wester rn exposure compare to CAF & has been appreciated by many foreign airforces incl uding USAF. & who gave u this trash information that Russians wont sell it's "its military C ORE technology to any nations including INDIA" if that the case then russia wont have made joint projects like brahmos ,T90 & PAKFA .This is ur absurd mentality thinking that is making u post such craps as Russia wont sell any key technolog y to China for the fear of piracy & their bitter experience about china used russia's own weapon against them in their bor der war with them.None of the issues is present with INDIA. Indian version of FF GA is going to much adavnced than RUssian version as it would have more Isreali & french systems installed on it ,I am saying this as some chinese fanboys claim that pakfa given to india would be inferior to russian version of PAKFA.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] 5. Another thing, you may be ignorant or have conveniently left out in your argu ment, the GPS integrated Navigation. China has the Beidou Satellite Navigation, where is India? Did you observed the SATCOM device located at the rear of the J1 0A glass canopy.[/QUOTE] LLLOLLZ india already going to launch IRNSS satellite system which would make it as capable as GPS & glonass . http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/pdf/icg/2008/expert/2-3.pdf So what if SATCOM device located at the rear of the J10A glass canopy. .U r talk ing as if great thing to have ,hey man 1st of all tell me does J10 has a proper AESA installed on it God knows whether that is a AESA or PESA :lol:

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] 6. Next question is how capable and reliable can India AWACS be without her own indigenous SATELLITE NAVIGATION SYSTEM? Drawing on the generosity of services of a foreign power again like a parasite One thing for sure, India can never hope to attain a status of SUPERPOWER e.g. USA, Russia even if she wants.[/QUOTE] I had replied it earlier BTW india had shown it's latest protype of it's indigen ious AWACS & ofcourse it would boost further our capabilties [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] In event of a conflict, India is totally BLACKOUT like in 1962, Nehru was about to leave New Delhi as the PLA forces was only 100 km away until his secretary in formed him that he heard over Radio Peking, China has declared the MISSION or WA R is over.[/QUOTE] LLOLLZ like all typical chinese fanboyic thinking they forget that just citing h istory books war doent mean that china would do that again ,if that the case then can japan blow china's A$$ es again tell me like 1937 ??? .If that the case then CHINA would have invaded Arunachal pradesh earlier, not only that even with vietnam & taiwan case can be considered. PLZ wake up from ur dreamland as India is Nuke powered & is not that same india of 1962 .

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Rafale was never intended for or designed as a stealth fighter.[/QUOTE] blah.... but it is far stealthier than all 4th & 4.5 gen aircraft in china 's in ventory :lol: plz read this [B][U][SIZE="6"][COLOR="red"]X)STEALTH:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/B] [IMG][B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]1)SURVIVALBILITY OF RAFALE:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U] [/B] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/SURVIVALBILITYOFR AFALE-1.jpg[/IMG] http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/AUTRES_DOCS/Fox _three/Fox_Three_nr_4.pdf [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]2)RAFALE'S STEALTH PROFILE[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/B] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/RAFALESSTEALTHPRO FILE.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALESJPEG.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALEAIRINTAKES.jpg[/IM G] even they havent left out the fuel ruefelling probe it is also ram coated unlike J10 lollz just see the pics u posted

Deliverance [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] Sorry, but facts disagree with you. No dude i know what i am saying [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] The J-10B incorporates 1200 T/R AESA,which is larger than the 880 T/R RBE-2,[/QU OTE] LOLLLZ it is still not known whether that is AESA or PESA . as Chinese specia list Andrei Chang himself claiming it is a passive model . http://www.defensenews.com/article/20110620/DEFFEAT06/106200314/Chinese-Avionics -Advances-Ripple-Throughout-Asia & that 880 T/R rbe 2 radar fiasco is a fake photoshop as claimed in various foru ms ,i had clearly enquired about it from freanch members of IDF & it has been debunked .It has 1000 T/R modules BTw rafale's AESA radar is going to have GaaN module & SAT COM technology instal led on it which has more advnaced capabilty equalling to the capablity of US aesa radar . Any way i would to like to enlighten u that Rafale thanks to it's 5th GEN spect ra EW suite has unique ability of passive detection of all aerial targets when t

hey are in active mode (radar turn on) from more than 100 miles away & not only that it can also cue it's air to air missiles without turning on it's own aesa radar for stealth reason .this capabilty other than rafale only F22 raptor ALR 94 sys tem has. ALso f35 may have it no confirmation yet. [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] composites,[/QUOTE] lllolz again how do u know it has more composites than rafale [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] radar absorbent material,[/QUOTE] blah... rafale has much high quality RAM coating than j10 ,and what cheap quali ty RAM coating china uses we can see from the pics of J20 when white flecks or patches are visible on plane surface when RAM s hed off it's surface.Only J20 looks shiny in photoshop pics only [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] DSI,[/QUOTE] Ok 1 innovative thing but it has some role in performance nothing to do with aer ial warfare [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] and 136 kN engine.[/QUOTE] BUT can it supercruise like that of rafale:lol: [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] The Rafale's composites and half serpentine do not match up.[/QUOTE] Blah.... see this [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]1)RAFALE'S STRUCTURAL COMPOSITION[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U ][/B] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/RAFALESSTRUCTURAL COMPOSITION.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALEAIRINTAKES.jpg[/IM G] [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] Its engines and performance do not match up either.[/QUOTE] Blah..... rafale engine has far less IR signature than WS10 thanks to it's 2 cooling chann els rafale engine can supercruise unlike WS 10. rafale has much higher T/W ratio than j10b as it is a twin engine fighter not a single engine fighter

[QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] Even the J-10A's specifications such as Mach 2 speed and 20300 m service ceilin g already outstrips the Rafale's specifications in every way.[/QUOTE] yes it has high speed compare to rafale but ur servicing ceiling value of j10b i s exaggerated ,Even mirage 2000 also has same speed that of j10b at high altitude does that make it superior lolzz. [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047]

The Rafale is nicknamed a semi stealth fighter, but again, that goes down the to ilet as soon as it bears external weaponry.[/QUOTE] llolllz as if all chinese 4th & 4.5 Gen fighter carry their weapon internally in their internal weapons bay . [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047] The J-15 and J-11B which incorporate AESA, RCS reduction methods, IRST, MAW, 132 kN engines, are powerful competitors for the Rafale. Blah... J15 & J11B 1) AESA:god knows!!! but even if it has it is much inferior to RBE 2 aesa radar in terms of LPI & new tech GaaN (gallium arsenide )modules along with satellli te communication 2) RCS reduction methods: OMG u r comparing a stealth of flanker variants to a s tealth Of RAFALE .LLOLLLZ Just check RCS of all flanker variants in the net. just having increased compos ites & RAM wont make a straight air intake plane like flanker & it's copy stealthy .LOLLLZ 3)IRST : much inferior to FSO as it''s undisclosed detection range of 100km ,as PAKFA IRST is known to have european seekers which nation apart from france could that be as french have good relationship wi th Russians 4)MAW : no way comparable to SPECTRA EW suite 5) 132KN engine : LLOLLLZZ can it supercruise [QUOTE=Deliverance;24047]To sum it up, the J-10B features the same upgrades on t he Rafale, and some to greater extent.[/QUOTE] BLAH.... (LOLLLZZ) I repeat that again no chinese 4th or 4.5 GEN fighter can be compared to Rafale in terms of technology & capabilty.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Another problem here is some of them do not understand India s MRCA ACQUISITION is based on the LOWEST TENDER. Commonsense tells us that the competing Dassault Av iation will not offer their best package maybe the standard PESA radar with all the others listed as accessories or perhaps options to upgrade later at a price e.g. the Damocles external pods.[/QUOTE] blah.... What bag of B.S !!! It's confirmed now ur not only clueless but brainle ss .Infact dassault is planning along with us to further upgrade it into F4/stea lth version & this guy is tallking " Dassault Aviation will not offer their best package maybe the standard PESA radar with all the others listed as accessories or perhaps options to upgrade later at a price e.g. the Damocles external pods. " LLOLLLZ how stupid & brainless one can be [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] But Damocles is already in use inside the Malaysia RMAF Russian made SU30MKM. Is that something for these Indians to rejoice or shout about? llollz DAMOCLES XF extended features system is already in development & would be included in rafale F3 variants It has more capabilty than previuos one [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]Damocles XF extended features:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/ B]

[IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/DamoclesXFextende dfeatures.jpg[/IMG] http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/Defence/Rafale/ Fox_Three_N_14_UK2.pdf [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Anyway the SPECTRA EW suite will not be fully functional e.g. jamming or decoyin g without an AESA radar which will only be made available this year onward if th e testing on the prototype is successful.[/QUOTE] In ur dreams SPECTRA is a combat tested platform & it doent need AESA radar for decoying if that so how is it working in this current versions of rafale which doent even have aesa radar. THis shows u have simply ZERO knowledge as expected about Electronic Support mea sures [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Based on what we are reading so far, the J10B is known to have similar capabilit y for identification, location, jamming, and decoying against an extensive range of electromagnetic, infra-red, and laser threats. Only thing is they don t call i t SPECTRA. The word SPECTRA is probably copyright, Ha Ha.[/QUOTE] BLAH ..... But it cant cue it's air to air missile with SPECTRA system without t urning on it's AESA radar for stealth reason [B][U][SIZE="4"][COLOR="red"]SPECTRA A DIGITAL REVOLUTION:[/COLOR][/SIZE][/U][/B ] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/SPECTRACOMPONENTS .jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i441/somnath30/RAFALE/SPECTRAADIGITALRE VOLUTION.jpg[/IMG] They could nt make a system comparable to SPECTRA in their 7 generations llolllz [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Apart from that what have we learn? 1. In addition to mounting destructive weaponry across its 11 hardpoints, t he J-10 can also field several avionics pods to help along in any given sortie. This includes the FILAT pod, the BLUE SKY navigation/attack pod, the BM/KG300G J AMMING POD, the KZ900 electronic reconnaissance pod and the Type Hong Guang infr a-red search and track pod. The BM/KG300G is of indigenous origin and primarily serves to combat all types of airborne and land-based pulse Doppler radar system s. The KZ900 is a relatively recent addition (late 1990s) to the Chinese militar y and is a fully-automatic reconnaissance pod designed to collect radar signals and provide for real-time order-of-battle. The Blue Sky is an advanced version o n what is believed to be based on a Western design from a downed Allied aircraft in the Gulf War. FILAT is considered to be the Chinese equivalent of the Wester n AN/AAQ-14 targeting pod.

2. At the 6th Zhuhai Air Show in 2006, the 3rd GENERATION of FILAT was debu ted and for security reasons, very little information was released except that n ewer microelectronics have been used to improve reliability and other performanc e parameters. First revealed to the public at 1998 Zhuhai Air Show, and it is designed by the 613 Institute of AVIC. FILAT pod is the Chinese equivalent of the AN/AAQ-14 targ eting pod of the INTIRN system, and several derivatives have already been develo ped since its public debut. The Chinese government has acknowledged that FILAT p od is based on the experience of the following three western targeting pods: LAN

TIRN, TIALD and LITENING targeting pods. Although the Chinese government has not mentioned how LANTIRN and TIALD systems had fallen into the Chinese hands, west ern sources have reported that China had obtained the systems from downed allied aircraft via Iraq during the Gulf War. WMD-7 day/night targeting pod is an integrative EO detection system, incorporati ng IR, TV and laser sensors, which can search, identify, track and designate the target on land or at sea by day & night.[/QUOTE]

BLAH .....just copy pasting stub articles from Wikipedia doesnt prove it's sen sor system comparable to western or Cutting edge french sensor system which have been combat proven in wars. Those chinese sensor systems only looks good visual ly & but god knows how it actually works in real time.Thats the reason why PAF was dying to have french avionics/sensor system for it's JF17.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Some are overly nationalistic and BLIND or manipulative perhaps but STUPID maybe not![/QUOTE] The truth is many of these nationalistic Indians upon hearing that India is acqu iring Rafale started surfing the net for new information not unlike some pro-Chi na enthusiasts. Many do not understand what they are reading. llollz but not all are morronic & fanboyic like u which post stub articles from wikipedia to prove that their indigenius (pirated )weapons are far superior to western & european weapons & is equall to star war film weapons :rofl: [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] The UNBELIEVABLE thing is the extent they went to, to beat the drum to promote a FOREIGN MADE product just to belittle another ASIAN country and what does that means? ASIANS has not brains.[/QUOTE] loollz ALL asians have brains ,but the biggest exception is YOu.Yes thats correc t ,as observed from the standard of ur clueless & garbage posts in this thread .It's confirmed that u r Brainless .

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] That is why I am reading and learning from Martian. His argument is sound, coher ent and logical. His comment about the round exhaust of the J20 is quite true but much like J10, J20 is an evolving design. The final variant may be a mean monster. I am impres sed, India LCA design has not changed a bit from the original 35 years ago.[/QUO TE] LLOLLLZ so what!! even JSF has round nozzles with saw tooth design on the nozzle s on it to deflect radar that makes a jack sense it is not stealhty to have roun d nozzles .:lol: PLZ educate urselves as u look like an illterate villager who still lives in dre amland as twin seater Naval variant of LCA with LEVCON have been developed. als o check about the APU intake in new protypes of LCA .

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] But you are something. You took an argument, twisted the info by selectively arg uing or pointing out facts that is basically worth NOTHING.[/QUOTE] To understand my points u need to have brains which u dont have as ur brainless :rofl: [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] TELL ME, are you seriously suggesting to me that the 4th gen. RAFALE is equal or better than a China 5th generation fighter J20?[/QUOTE] llolllz i have nt compared rafale to J20 Bleak dragon but i had only compared r afale's canards with J20 canards which are far better than J20 canards in terms of stealth . [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Here is my observation and I declared I am not a ROCKET SCIENTIST.[/QUOTE] which u trully not are, as ur observation as garbage & rotten as ur brain:lol: [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] While you use the saw tooth on the back of the canards of a RAFALE to support yo ur argument, the underbelly, the windtips of the RAFALE is a total DISASTER comi ng to stealthiness. It will even be worse when the RAFALE is fully armed?[/QUOTE ] Thats why i said ur brainless as i never compared rafale entire body framework w ith J20 but only it's canards which is no way stealthy as rafale SEE MY POV above ,.Infact ur great friend martian as usua l time & again proven his unrivalled stupidity by himself unnecessarily comparin g entire rafale with J20 doent even applying a common sense that even a new born baby knows it is a not a 5th generation plane & on top of it ur as gullible lik e an illterate villager also beleiving his POV & thats not all on top of it ur a ccusing me of such foolish & unnecessary comparision of Rafale's entire plane wi th a steath plane which in my whole God damned life i wont do .HUH!!!!!

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] OMG! You equal the wingtip of a J20 to that of a Mirage 2000. That tells me some thing, Nationalistic Indians like you refuse to believe that the Chinese Militar y Industries is 20 years ahead of India today and try to belittle China enthusia sts like us by bring out irrelevant arguments.[/QUOTE] llollz consider urselves lucky as i was thinking to equate with LCA delta wings ,but i didnt :lol: Well that guy which posts quality are as clueless & hopeless as yours,i feels i t's not even worth to reply this kind of B.S posts , U forgot that despite all that still china incorporates vintage design features like delta wing /rounded LERX / canards in their 5th gen fighters which shows h ow advanced they are :rofl: [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] At Indian Forums, Indian nationalistic posters says the darndest things: Here are some example: India LCA can easily beat a F22 RAPTOR, Indian experts claimed 5~6 years ago in Bharat Rakshak, huh![/QUOTE] llolllz even pakistani nationalistic posters also claimed that JF 17 would tak e down F22 in their forums but it crashed so miserably in attock that even some pakistani administrative officials decided to sue Pakistani government & their airforce officials in court why they bought su ch cheap chinese crap :rofl: http://www.defence.pk/ji-concerned-jf-17-crash-asks-investigation-583/ [QUOTE=capricorn;24055] No problem, only the screws were loosen when the Kaveri Test failed, Huh![/QUOTE ] blah ...atleast kaveri didnt blast in mid air like in SU 27 testmule in 2004 ,th at still china's export targeted countries are scared to induct it . also for ur kind information atleast KAVERI can power UCAV & would be done .Mea nwhile recently deal has been signed with scenema to codevelop it now obviously u would say it woulld be a paintshop indig enious french engine for india like typical low grade chinese mentality thinking ,but Who the F^^^^ cares about that

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Now someone from there comes here and claimed the IMPORTED RAFALE can beat every aircraft in the China Air Forces. Huh![/QUOTE] yes it can defeat all 4th to 4.5 gen fighters NOt only that if u dont consider a wacs here ,then thanks to it's 5th GEN SPECTRA electronic warfare suite it can p assively detect a stealthy J20 if it is in active mode (i.e radar turn on) & ca n cue it's air to air missiles witout turning on it's own aesa radar for stealth reason .DOES J20 bleak dragon has that capablity LOLLLZZ. U need cutting edge avionics ,ECM & missiles to win a aerial combat as stealth can help u to win combat but it wont shoot dow n ur targets,which chinese cant make it in seven generations.EVEN pakistan also knows that thats why they begged the french for avionics sensor system & mica missiles for JF17 as they know the miserable standards of chinese avionics sensor system but we armtwisted it.

[QUOTE=capricorn;24055] Somnath999, much like me, we both knows a little bit but not enough about RADAR deflection or Stealth.[/QUOTE] Tell u what man ur knowledge & views is not even worth my D^ck's hair & on top o f it ur equatting me with u who looks brainless from the very beginning by seei ng ur previous posts in J10 thread.I just dont know what to say ,consider urselv es lucky that i didnt said anything more bad /abusive about u & i forgive u for ur sin by comparing me with u . Now get lost & plz stop wasting my time .U want attention then rather do one thi ng join Disney forum & say there HUHHHH...LOLLZZ [QUOTE=Kiss_of_the_Dragon;2799100]As i said before Vietnam is alway been use and dump like gabage...Vietnamese diplomatic skills are over-rated...they thought t hat they could use U.S.S.R and U.S against China...end up to the other way aroun d..[/QUOTE] tell u what ur posts have always been as usual an utter garbage regarding histor y:D . I qoute from wikipedia [QUOTE]The Chinese also achieved another strategic objective of demonstrating to their Cold War foe, the Soviet Union, that they were unable to protect their Vi etnamese ally On November 3, 1978, the USSR and Vietnam signed a twenty-five year mutual defen se treaty,[18] which made Vietnam the "linchpin" in the USSR's "drive to contain China." The reason cited for the attack was the mistreatment of Vietnam's ethnic Chinese minority and the Vietnamese occupation of the Spratly Islands (claimed by the P RC). To prevent Soviet intervention on Vietnam's behalf, Deng warned Moscow the next day that China was prepared for a full-scale war against the USSR; in prepa ration for this conflict, China put all of its troops along the Sino-Soviet bord er on an emergency war alert, set up a new military command in Xinjiang, and eve n evacuated an estimated 300,000 civilians from the Sino-Soviet border.[21] In a ddition, the bulk of China's active forces (as many as one-and-a-half million tr oops) were stationed along China's borders with the USSR.[22] In response to China's attack, the USSR sent several naval vessels and initiated a Soviet arms airlift to Vietnam. However the USSR felt that there was simply n o way that they could directly support Vietnam against the PRC; the distances we re too great to be an effective ally, and any sort of reinforcements would have to cross territory controlled by the PRC or U.S. allies. The only realistic opti on would be to indirectly re-start the simmering border war with China in the no rth. Vietnam was important to Soviet policy but not enough for the Soviets to go to war over. When Moscow did not intervene, Beijing publicly proclaimed that th e USSR had broken its numerous promises to assist Vietnam. The USSR's failure to support Vietnam emboldened China to announce on April 3, 1979, that it intended to terminate the 1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, and Mutual As sistance. [/QUOTE] so soviet union had tried to help vietnam but logistically & practically it was impossible for soviet union to defend vietnam against china . United states on the other hand was neutral & was happy that soviet influence wo uld be reduced in that region aftermath that war. [QUOTE=Kiss_of_the_Dragon;2799100] As India thought they can use Soviet as counter-weight to China and draw China f

ar away from Tibet in 90s..but Gorbashev was not stupid...stroke an agreement wi th Deng and have a peace border...since then you India don't have this leverage [/QUOTE] blah .... india had never thought infact india always had used soviet union as a counter w eight to china & if that not true china would have definetely helped pakistan against india in 1971 wars ,but they didnt.Sovie t union after the border war with china knew that china wasnt trustworthy ally so they prefer india to support rather th an china aftermath that war . Gorbachev was a weak leader & he knew that soviet were economically & military w eakened after the debacle of afghanistan war,so he decided to improve ties with west & also china & eventually soviet union was collapsed. After the collapse of soviet union russia was formed which had financial problem s to sustain it's defence industry for that it needed help from other important countries like india ,china to help it finan cially by buying it's weapons.But china after the tianmanen square massacre had sanctions imposed against it & all the europea n & us weapons sale to it was prohibited ,so the russian weapons were the only weapons available to them at that time .So the y improved their ties with russia by solving border disputes with them & formed SCO union. [QUOTE=Kiss_of_the_Dragon;2799100] Yes...nice try to stir up Sino-Russia relation...you're not in the league ...not yet.[/QUOTE] dude u forgot that india is russia's no 1 weapon's market & india is one of the most important ally of russia . They sell those weapons to india which no other country would dare to share it w ith other country no matter how close that nation may be to that country.:lol:

[QUOTE=Secur;2799107]You know better than me about Vietnamese equipment and the Chinese one :lol: I didn't expect this comment from you bro ...[/QUOTE] bro, u failed to comprehend what i said ,i had never said that vietnam navy is s tronger than chinese navy check my post again. [QUOTE=Secur;2799107] [B]Mischief Reef or Meiji Reef (Chinese: ???; pinyin: Meiji Jiao; Tagalog: Panga niban; Vietnamese: Vnh Khan) is a reef in the Spratly Islands in South China Sea. Some rocks above water at low tide. It has a lagoon.[1] The reef is controlled b y the People's Republic of China The Philippines once largely controlled this fe ature. Filipino fishermen used to fish at the reef.[2][3][4] The Philippines dec ided not to attack since it could have led the two countries into a war, the con sequences of which could have escalated into a wider conflict. The Philippines i s a treaty military ally of the United States. [/B] [B]The Johnson South Reef Skirmish of 1988 (Vietnamese: H?i chi?n Tru?ng Sa?; Ch

inese: ?????; pinyin: Chgua jiaohai zhn) was a naval battle that took place betwee n Chinese and Vietnamese forces over Johnson South Reef in the Spratly Islands o n March 14, 1988. Result Vietnamese soldiers massacred by Chinese heavy artillery Chinese naval victory, 6 islands captured by the PLAN[/B] [B]The Battle of the Paracel Islands was a military engagement fought between th e naval forces of the People s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam) in the Paracel Islands on January 19, 1974. Result Chinese victory People's Republic of China gaining total control over Paracel Islands [/B] History tells us otherwise mate ... Seriously , Vietnam just doesn't have the ca pacity to stop China if it once decides to attack ...

[/QUOTE] well mate history says vietnam got defeated ,but it is in history ,u should look the situation now ,vietnam navy of now is not the same navy of those 70's or 80 's .They have acquired many new stealth gepard class warships & kilo submarines from russia ,also not to forget the Su 30 jets they have acquired too.Yes numeri cally those are inferior to chinese navy but they have much better chance to defend themselves as compare to previous wars . well as u mentioned history then u should also notice that even in parcel island s war in 74 ,they did manage to sink type 271 corvette of china which the chines e deny & damage many other ships. i quote from wikipedia [QUOTE][B]Chinese casualties[/B] According to South Vietnam, corvette #271 of China sank, #396 ran aground, and # 274 and #389 were both heavily damaged. The Western press also reported at least one Chinese vessel had been sunk.[citation needed] According to China, however, although all Chinese ships were hit numerous times, none of the vessels sank. China said warships #271 and #389 suffered speed-redu cing engine damage, but they returned to port safely and were rapidly repaired. Warship #274 was damaged more extensively and had to stop at Yongxing Island for emergency repair, returning to Hainan under its own power the next day. Warship #396 was damaged the most, with an engine room explosion: with the help of the minesweepers, it managed to run aground and put out the fire, and was towed back to its base. The Chinese confirmed 18 deaths among their various forces; Vietna mese estimates were markedly higher. Because the Vietnamese force was not a high-seas fleet, their radar and surveill ance equipment was perhaps inadequate for assessing actual combat damage. Accord ing to the Chinese, the heavy smoke reported around #271 and others was not the result of damage but a deliberately laid smokescreen, although this explanation has been viewed skeptically.[who?] The reluctance of the Chinese military to rel ease further details or evidence has left the issue clouded. In any case, the Ch inese squadron left the pursuit of the Vietnamese to their reinforcements (ships #281 and #282, among others), giving the impression that they were unable to co ntinue.[/QUOTE] yes the chinese navy is stronger but that doesnt mean that vietnam navy cant fig

ht :D [QUOTE=Secur;2799292]You said it yourself ... Changing your statement , are you ? What is Vietnam buying ? DF-21 D ? :azn:[/QUOTE] no they are not buying DF21d & they dont need that kind of missile But yes they are heavily interested in Brahmos supersonic AsCM or even russian y akhont which can give them remarkable fire power against the chinese navy. As th e chinese navy dont have any air defence like the american SEA ram OR the french PAAMS (aster 15-30) ship based SAM missile which can engage anti ship supers onic missile.

[QUOTE=Beast;2800040]Tell this to little Georgia.. Where is uncle Sam assist whe n Russia kick his *** in 2008? Lol... Georgia sign an defence pact with US and everybody knows it just a piece of pape r with no value.[/QUOTE]

U really expect US come out and fight for Vietnam? Arent u naive?[/QUOTE] oh boy!! what makes u think that they wouldnt come out & fight for vietnam .Hadn t they deployed their carrier fleet group near japan during the 3rd taiwan straight crisis .If the US wouldnt show up then why had it made naval bases in those countries nearby china (JAPAN ,south korea & p hillpines ).:lol: If the US dont come out for vietnam then automatically all those allies of US in that region would lose faith in US