In message , Chad Irby
writes
In article ,
"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

I'll take the designers opinion on the issue, thanks.

Better yet, look at the friggin' plane and read their website.

Right. I talk to the design engineers, you read a website.

Fuurfu.

It was a
minor redesign of the intake and addition of RAM. It doesn't take much
to drop that one area's RCS by a *lot*.

Also doesn't tale much to choke the engine or give it some nasty habits
at high AoA. (Remember how much fun the F-111 had with inlet design, and
that wasn't even trying for low RCS?)

After reshaping the intake, sure.

Not by much, though, and mostly enlarging it a *little* to allow for a
bit more thickness due to the RAM.

With what knock-on effects elsewhere...?

Where's the "reduced RCS" field modification for the F-15 or F-16, if
it's such a simple change?


--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk