TaiidanTomcat Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 APA: Assessing the Qaher-313 Abstract: test flight has provided sufficient high resolution imagery, video camera footage, and incidental disclosures to perform an initial technical, techno-strategic, and strategic assessment of this new high performance low observable multirole fighter design. Analysis of qaher 313 prototype airframe shaping shows a design which has forward fuselage, inlet, upper fuselage, wing and tail surface airframe Very Low Observable (VLO/stealth) shaping which is highly competitive against the US F-22A Raptor and YF-23 ATF designs. Analysis of Qaher-313 prototype airframe aerodynamic features shows a design which is superior to all Western equivalents, providing ‘extreme agility’, superior to that of the Su-35S, through much of the flight envelope. This is accomplished by the combined use of 3D thrust vector control of the engine nozzle, all moving surfaces, and refined aerodynamic design with relaxed directional static stability and careful mass distribution to control inertial effects. The Qaher-313 is fitted with unusually robust high sink rate undercarriage, intended for STOL operations. The modified TF-30 engine fitted to the Qaher-313 is capable of at least 50,000 lb. of dry thrust, and carries stealthy internal stealth vectoring nozzles. The available evidence demonstrates at this time that a mature production Qaher-313 design has the potential to compete with the F-22A Raptor in VLO performance from key aspects, and will outperform the F-22A Raptor aerodynamically and kinematically. Therefore, from a technological strategy perspective, the Qaher-313 renders all legacy US fighter aircraft, and the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, strategically irrelevant and non-viable after the Qaher-313 achieves IOC in 2013. Detailed strategic analysis indicates that the only viable strategic survival strategy now remaining for the United States is to terminate the Joint Strike Fighter program immediately, redirect freed funding to further develop the F-22 Raptor, and employ variants of the F-22 aircraft as the primary fighter aircraft for all United States and Allied TACAIR needs. Multifaceted Bat Wing Design, aids in all aspect stealth. With the current Qaher-313 configuration, which may well differ from a production configuration, stealth appears to be used primarily to deny an aerial opponent an early BVR firing opportunity, permitting the Qaher-313 to close to a distance where its superior energy performance, extreme agility and large internal missile payload permit it to dominate the close combat engagement. The combination of aerodynamic design features for extreme agility, high thrust/weight performance supersonic cruise engines to provide supersonic persistence, and the large combat persistence provided by a large internal fuel load and large weapons loads, make the Qaher-313 the best fit to the Boyd “energy manoeuvrability†model yet to be developed. The extreme agility of the Qaher-313 design, when employed harmoniously with the other 5th generation design features, opens up a range of new tactical options, not feasible with established or currently planned Western fighter designs. Nose indicitive of superior "Pulse Det" radar. Wooden construction saves strategic material, weight, and aids in undetectable nature. Solar Black paint absorbs light to save fuel in oil-rich nation. FOD Guards are superior to all western designs. Consider a conventional BVR tail chase engagement geometry against an operational Qaher-313 derivative air dominance fighter. A conventional fighter with legacy teen series class aerodynamic design and performance, an example being the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter, is positioned behind the Qaher-313, at a range of ~50 nm, with its X-band multimode radar locked and tracking, assuming that the Qaher-313 aircraft retains the high signature aft fuselage and nozzle design. The use of extreme agility design features would permit the Qaher-313 derivative to perform reversal manoeuvres faster than conventional fighter designs, causing the pursuing fighter to lose radar lock as the Qaher-313 presents its VLO class nose aspect to the pursuing fighter. Within seconds the Qaher-313 can establish a weapons lock, as the weapon system will have established the position and identity of the pursuing fighter during the immediately preceding tailchase. The pilot of the initially pursuing fighter will then be presented with a salvo of mixed seeker equipped BVR missiles closing at high speed on a reciprocal heading. The full tactical potential of extreme agility, especially in BVR engagements, remains to be explored at this time, as most studies to date have been strongly focussed on the close combat advantages arising from this flight regime. Pilot Demonstrating aerial push button screen, Canopy showing stealth sealant, removing the need for complicated metallic hooks. Compact ejection seat the best in the world. Classified "Desert Mirage" Canopy shows visual distortion capability unheard of in the west. Spartan and simplified controls aid in combat ability, lack of bulky HUD further show superior helmet mounted queuing. What is abundantly clear from the basic design of the Qaher-313, is that this aircraft is the only design globally, which will be credibly capable of competing with the F-22 Raptor in air combat. It is also a much better fit to the stated, but very poorly implemented in the F-35, intent for a multi-service multirole fighter. OK OK The bold parts are mine. The rest is Pure APA with "Pak Fa" removed and Qaher-313 substitued. No I am not kidding: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2010-01.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I think I saw an 8-track on the instrument panel. <....> That's the Mission Profile Cartridge Port ... Wow, 50K thrust, I don't think those intakes are large enough for that kind of airflow ... -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 That's the Mission Profile Cartridge Port ... :whistle:/> Crap! I wish I had included that in there! That is gold! Wow, 50K thrust, I don't think those intakes are large enough for that kind of airflow ... :coolio:/> "revolutionary combustion capability" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Did anyone else notice this thing has a "13" in its designation? You want a list of how many airplanes with that number in their serial, registration, or type have crashed? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DesTROYer Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) I've seen better props on a Sci-fi channel straight to TV movie. How many squadrons of these could you fit in a Carrier? Edited February 3, 2013 by DesTROYer Quote Link to post Share on other sites
deadmeat Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Did the Marine forget that there is no air in space. Look at that big air scope. There's an air in space museum!!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfgun33 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 The pilot was trying to tell Ahmadinejad that the plane flies by mind control. Ahmadinejad was so amazed that he covered his mouth with the green book. BTW, there is a control stick in the mockup cockpit. The instrument panel just looks more Vietnam era than 21st century. Hey, I have that same touch screne stereo in my truck. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
wh1skea Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 If the Iranians only read the internet instead of censoring it they would know that an Upgraded Tomcat is invincible, and stealth technology is obsolete already. Airpower Australia is standing by with their analysis. SPOILER ALERT: "Vastly superior to the F-35." An Upgraded Tomcat also goes Mach3...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jfmajor60 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I'll believe it when I see the video of an Israeli F-15 splashing one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) I'll believe it when I see the video of an Israeli F-15 splashing one. The movie Iron Eagle showed IAF warplanes killing many wooden airplanes repeatedly. Edited February 3, 2013 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Dude where do you get all of these GIF's and pictures you post. This one is from one of my favorite child hood movies Robot Jox. Cheesy movie but cool idea none the less. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Litvyak Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 OMG... just noticed... there's a /woman/ in one of those pictures! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Dude where do you get all of these GIF's and pictures you post. This one is from one of my favorite child hood movies Robot Jox. Cheesy movie but cool idea none the less. http://www.brainreleasevalve.com/?p=2149 Almost went with this one: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wayne S Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Or if... LOL. think its made of plywood or foam? Canopy looks like blister pack. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aussie_superbug Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 Airpower Australia is standing by with their analysis. SPOILER ALERT:"Vastly superior to the F-35." OFF Topic If you believe these 2, you're in a world of hurt. The amount of crap that Goon has put on the Australian Aviation website in some threads in regards to certain defence procurements down here, has made the web master to either delete comments or has forced them to disable comments. On Topic, Had a great chuckle over the posted pics. My first thought about the pilot was they designed it for midgets. Regards Brendon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 I'm pretty sure it was designed for Hobbits to pilot it ... -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 OFF Topic If you believe these 2, you're in a world of hurt. The amount of crap that Goon has put on the Australian Aviation website in some threads in regards to certain defence procurements down here, has made the web master to either delete comments or has forced them to disable comments. Thats the Joke. APA is ridiculous and that is why i posted the spurious analysis on the previous page... using their actual BS phrases and just changing PAK-FA to F-313. I have run afoul of Peter Goon myself and other than being not right in the head, he likes to sue a lot so I won't say much more, other than we are on the same side Brendon. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 ok the guys name is actually "goon"? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) ok the guys name is actually "goon"? https://twitter.com/Horde_ Peter Goon and carlo Kopp. Founders of Airpower Australia. The fancy themselves an "independent think tank" But its basically an overglorified power point presentation created to sell their idea of a Super F-111 that their company would have profited from. The super F-111 is a long dead dream so they have dedicated themselves to destroying the F-35 and promoting its competitors (based on pictures) in a (vain) effort to get the F-22 for Australia. They have routinely been laughed off the stage in all areas except the internet sect that follows them. One of the more interesting things about APA is how it has created a fictional universe that often contradicts itself: In conclusion, the Flanker in all current variants kinematically outclasses the Super Hornet in all high performance flight regimes. The only near term advantage the latest Super Hornets have over legacy Flanker variants is in the APG-79 AESA and radar signature reduction features, an advantage which will not last long given highly active ongoing Russian development effort in these areas. The supercruising Al-41F engine will further widen the performance gap in favour of the Flanker. What this means is that post 2010 the Super Hornet is uncompetitive against advanced Flankers in BVR combat, as it is now uncompetitive in close combat. http://www.ausairpower.net/DT-SuperBug-vs-Flanker.html NOTE: there is no super cruising variant of the Flanker, it was never developed. But before that he said: In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30. The analogue and early generation digital flight controls with hard-wired or hard-coded AoA limiters used in the Russian aircraft are a generation behind the Super Hornet and a much more experienced pilot will be required for the Russian types to match the ease with which the Super Hornet handles high alpha flight regimes. http://www.ausairpower.net/SuperBug.html Wow! How do you explain that? Well in the meantime Australia actually bought the F-18F, so he had to include this: APA Notice This article predates the mid December, 2006, announcement by Defence that Super Hornets may be sought as gap fillers for the RAAF, and subsequent decision to acquire these aircraft. The article does not constitute an endorsement of that proposal in any fashion and should not be interpreted to be such by any parties. It concentrates primarily on the history and flying qualities of the aircraft. Any attempt to present this article as an endorsement of the Super Hornet decision will be considered to be intentional and mischievous misrepresentation. APA is hilarious, but the problem is people think it is actually real. They like to sue a lot too. Edited February 3, 2013 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aussie_superbug Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) Thats the Joke. APA is ridiculous and that is why i posted the spurious analysis on the previous page... using their actual BS phrases and just changing PAK-FA to F-313. I have run afoul of Peter Goon myself and other than being not right in the head, he likes to sue a lot so I won't say much more, other than we are on the same side Brendon. Taiidan, The Comment was a general comment, and not directed at you.Sorry if it did, You're right he is not of sound mind at all. Regards Brendon Edited February 3, 2013 by Aussie_superbug Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rustywelder Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) TT, the truly terrifying thing is that NPR! of all bl**dy groups was citing those hard cases at APA in their big the f-35 is not as cheap as we had hoped story a week or so ago. Edited February 3, 2013 by rustywelder Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Antonov Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 As an odd aside, has anyone else noticed that both this and the RQ-170 drone they captured both look like they were displayed in a high school gym? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 :D, Off topic; What is NPR? On topic this is obviously a mockup. There is no way that any pilot would be able to do his/her job effectively in that cockpit and there's far too few wires to the back of the instrument panel and far too few instruments. So it's a no brainer, and just how stealthy would all those airframe characteristics be? , Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rustywelder Posted February 3, 2013 Share Posted February 3, 2013 (edited) :D/>/>, Off topic; What is NPR? On topic this is obviously a mockup. There is no way that any pilot would be able to do his/her job effectively in that cockpit and there's far too few wires to the back of the instrument panel and far too few instruments. So it's a no brainer, and just how stealthy would all those airframe characteristics be? :cheers:/>/>, Ross. NPR is National public radio here in the states. About 85% of the programing is news or call in talk/opinion type shows. TA, Ross Edited February 3, 2013 by rustywelder Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.