Search results

That whole place is larp and troll central.... so it attracts larpers and trolls. This goes up to the highest levels.....so it is pretty futile in the end to extract some water out of the stone so to speak.

Feb 5th update: Archiving up to early january completed. Delineation of the following into archives (and relevant post moves) will be done in near future when time available : Tejas mk1/A (existing) mk2/MWF/TEDBF (existing only as TEDBF separately now) AMCA (dedicated only for it, right...

https://defencehub.live/threads/suggestion.57/page-9#post-50469

Thanks bro @Sinan , so first 4 articles are the "core" articles for Turkey like I mentioned earlier. A very useful post you have made to give the context. BTW: I think 2nd line should be 3/5ths i.e 60%?

Soft warning (0 pts since its first time) issued to @Farooq Rashid Butt and thread ban of 1 month for attempt at circumventing forum rules by using his own blog article and attacking whole country w.r.t "terrorism". As for the point you were trying to make (which you are free to explore in your...

guys, this is the guided munitions thread.... :D

adsense etc...orients to your browsing cookies etc i believe :ROFLMAO:

For all the batman TAS fans, you will get it hehe:

Turkey did so recently, its a sounding rocket that they are shaping up to be larger platform over time: https://defencehub.live/threads/turkish-space-programs.339/page-11#post-22686 Roketsan is going places, this decade should be interesting for them.

I don't see high-bypass mentioned anywhere. Anyway if you saw it someplace, its probably some different convention being followed in the definition. Its not big deal.

I'll add my comments a bit later, just want to hear any others first.

Honestly it made sense to stick to French for propulsion matters in general. They were instrumental in viking/vikas for ISRO dev. during the 70s/80s. GTRE and whomever else should have just roped them in from start around that same time LCA concept was conceived in 80s too. Instead they bit...

Can I get the catalogue file you are referring to? Or screen cap of it? 0.7 - 0.8 is well within low bypass ratio. It is done this way because it has to be supersonic capable. There is no way you can make a high bypass engine go supersonic....as the 50/50 mark (at ratio of 1) goes in favour...

On the contrary (IMO) , it was still a very useful read, and I certainly appreciated reading your perspective and experience here. We all get sidetracked from time to time, but I think that's a good thing in lot of cases because you get a fuller perspective of the land when a river meanders...

Maybe higher bypass ratio than before, but it wont be "high-bypass" for a supersonic role. It will definitely be under a ratio of 1. For supersonic, you need as much of the exit velocity of the jet to be that supersonic speed too. Thats a direct high level need for fighter aircraft...

My 2 cents (I may be in error and be grateful for correction or addition): Quoting example from: http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/64/1536/16861.pdf .....The second Paragraph of the revised version of Article 14 of the Turkish Constitution repeats almost verbatim Article 17 of the ECHR...

It is made under license. Depending on what the TEI facility has, some will be ground up, other bits will be provided by GE. Here is longer post on the turk capability here: https://defencehub.live/threads/tf-x-turkish-fighter-trainer-aircraft-projects.5/page-26#post-46820

Its low-bypass.....bypass ratio will be somewhere in 0.7 - 0.8 range if its like F110. Mid bypass starts around 2.....and high bypass around 4 generally.

As it relates to India specifically, will be continued here: https://defencehub.live/threads/india-us-archive.2376/#post-50232