Latest Thread
I think it really is a different missile from UAV-230. Both Roketsan and Baykar called it Jet-230 and doesn't have the spinning tailfins UAV-230 has as far as I can seeIHA 230 from Kizilelma
Max range 200km+
Using a high-angle trajectory, air-launched missiles of this type can travel roughly three times the distance they would cover if launched from the ground. The video clearly shows the missile gaining altitude after launch. Since TRG-230 reaches 70 km when launched from the ground, we can estimate its range to be roughly 210 km.IHA 230 from Kizilelma
Max range 200km+
Better composites = less rcsKizilelma has no cockpit and is way smaller than all 5. Gen fighter jets. It has to be a smaller RCS than any of these jets. But it has not.
Why?
Better composites = less rcs
Better composites = more money
Better ram coating = less rcs
Better ram coating = more money
Better rcs optimized body shape&curves = more production cost
F-35 ~100 million dollars
KE <50 million dollars
Same goes for B-2 and F-35. Is B-2 smaller?
If you asked why KE has RCS values similar to 4.5th gen jets like Rafale, EF or KF-21; that would be a better question.
What is your reference for what the RCS is, Kızılelma is supposed to be better than those planes.Composite, yes it is expensive.‘Body‘ (geometry) is not that expensive. RAM should be ready and in use by KAAN. Kizilelma could use same coating.
If Kizilelma has same RCS like Rafale or EF-200, then it is really bad conditions.
What is your reference for what the RCS is, Kızılelma is supposed to be better than those planes.
The Rcs value of kizilelma is higher compared to other 5th gen fighters like a F35 f22 or chinese models but is leaps smaller than any 4,5 gen fighter jet. There is also a misunderstanding when it comes to the Rcs value of Eurofighter or rafale these can have a relative small rcs value but only from a direct approach and without any payload and that is not realistic under normal conditions the RCS is a minimum of 1 sqm if not higher. Kizilelma is also still in its infancy and baykar is still new to the game of producing advanced composite airframes with time the RCs value will decrease as production quality increases.
I said these not @Huelague so I will answer. If we consider KE's RCS value (which we don't know) as 0.1m², 4.5th gens RCS values as 1m² and 5th gen RCS values as <0.01; this makes KE's RCS values similar to 4.5th gens more than it is similar to 5th gens. With "similar", I don't mean "same" but "closer when compared".If you asked why KE has RCS values similar to 4.5th gen jets like Rafale, EF or KF-21; that would be a better question.
A plane's geometry could affect the production costs more than you think. YF-23, as you know, was extremely expensive and it's geometry had a noteworthy slice from the cake. With new production technologies, it is much cheaper but KE is a low-budget, low-cost aircraft. It may still be expensive for it.‘Body‘ (geometry) is not that expensive.
Sure, depends on the performance on KE and price. A high-quality ram coating would be perfect on Kaan but if KE's design has flaws and it shines on radars even if you use high-quality ram coating and if it is indeed expensive, they could use a more effective option.RAM should be ready and in use by KAAN. Kizilelma could use same coating.
Will those screws stay visible in serial production? I expected them to hide these after S1.
How reliable is this source?
Source is not reliable, but what he wrote is %100 correct.How reliable is this source?