mattSee WD40 thats all it needed.. ok
Anyway saw the video on you tube the LCA TEJAS is obviously far superior as it has more % of composites!
Joking aside it looks gorgeous.. wish they had made the YF-23
mattHmm forum hysteria once again?
who knows but “failure of a basic system” could mean just that.. i.e. the system that failed was pretty basic… which could or could not be cured by a bit of WD40! who knows!
Oh well atleast its entertaining.
mattRussian 5th-generation fighter to perform maiden flight Jan 29.
© RIA Novosti.Related NewsRussia could start 5th generation fighter tests by yearend
Russia to start 5th generation fighter tests in 2010 – deputy PM
Russia, India to jointly develop 5th-generation fighter
10:0728/01/2010
MultimediaInfographics:Su-30MKI (Flanker-H) multirole fighter
Photo:MiG fighter planes: An illustrated history
Russia is expected to hold the first test of its fifth-generation fighter on Friday, a source at Russia’s largest aircraft building enterprise said on Thursday.
“The [test] flight was initially scheduled for Thursday, but has been postponed,” the source at the Gagarin KNAAPO company, a subsidiary of Russia’s major aircraft holding Sukhoi, said.
Russia’s only known fifth-generation project is Sukhoi’s PAK FA and the current prototype is the T-50. It is designed to compete with the U.S. F-22 Raptor (so far the world’s only fifth-generation fighter aircraft) and the F-35 Lightning II, but has yet to take to the skies.
The PAK FA is believed to possess advanced avionics, stealth capability, a ferry range of 4,000 to 5,500 km, and endurance of 3.3 hrs; it is armed with next-generation air-to-air, air-to-surface, and air-to-ship missiles, and has two 30-mm cannons.
Russia has been developing its newest fighter since the 1990s. Russian Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin earlier said the combat aircraft would enter service with the Air Force in 2015.
MOSCOW, January 28 (RIA Novosti)
mattI believe I read a news report stating that the British armed forces were looking into something like the Tuccono for COIN ops to keep in line with current budgetary difficulties. A COIN carrier would be perfect for us as well. This would allow us to keep the 65ton carriers in Dock in the UK (as i am sure will happen when we realise that we dont have the budget to keep the carriers swimming around constantly) but still have something to support our troops in AF-PAK region.
mattIf India raises a few regiments of Brahmos for use as heavy artillery, would that be the first time this is done ?
What are the strategic aspects of having multiple regiments of super sonic cruise missiles ? w.r.t Pak & China.
Suddenly any major target (formations, temp HQ, ammunition dumps etc) is within range of an unstoppable pinpoint strike without prior warning. And this can be repeated many times.
Not sure how many india can afford, but I’d like to see a oversupply of Bhramos in the inventory.
Having Brahmos is great dont get me wrong but but the MOD need to step out of the current US-INDO bhai bhai mode first and let the IA buy which ever artillary system it needs (not force onto the IA the BAE M777)
155 artillary should be first priority for the MOD.
mattWell, it’s surprising that the PAK FA has a more conservative aerodynamic configuration than the F-22. That doesn’t sounds too good to me, consider the S-37 is built to test a radical aerodynamical configuration and the famous su-27 that it is replacing is aerodynamically superior to the f-15. It seems like the PAK FA is similar to the XF-23 in concept.
Unless your an insider and you have proof that the PAK FA is a knock off from the YF-23 I dont think you can sumarise from the sentance that “It is more conservative aerodynamically than the F-22” to mean that it is going to be like the XF-23 (by which i guess you mean the YF-23)? :S .. Heck it was the YF-23 than excellent! it was supposed to be superior in some respects anyway!
Hysteria grabbing the forums me thinks!
mattWould they not have integrated something like the phalanx anti mortor or rocket system into the iron dome for these types of rockets? I guess the range would be very limited however and therefor the protection it would give.
mattI am going mad! haha..
Wonder if this is what it was like for people anticipating the first revelation of the B-2A?
Maybe this has had more hype to it than any of the teen fighters/bombers and possibly also the B-2A because of the simple fact that its post cold war and things have been a bit more open.
Does anyone remember the YF-23 and YF-22 face off? did they reveal photos and pictures before the first flight of the two aircraft?
mattThis thread is driving me crazy! each time i see a new post i quickly log on to see if the photo of the PAK-FA has been released!
Oh has anyone got any names for the PAK FA? official that is..
mattNot a direct comparison of any submarines or even i guess giving any useful performance figures for submarines however
as the debate between SSK etc is going it might be interesting for people to read the artical below.
http://apac2020.the-diplomat.com/feature/the-next-arms-race/
mattJSF – Navy Ready To Abandon Ship?
Posted by Bill Sweetman at 1/15/2010 5:17 AM CST
The Navy is not happy with the new joint-service fighter. It’s gained weight during development, but more importantly, the Navy isn’t sure that the capabilities it provides are what they want to spend more money on. It’s tempting to scrap it and go with an alternative, from a company with recent carrier-jet experience. The obstacle is a headstrong Secretary of Defense who’s staked his reputation on the joint program, but the signals are clear: the moment he’s gone the Navy’s going to bail.
Enough about the F-111. What about JSF?
For the service of “loose lips sink ships”, the Navy leaked the blandly titled “Joint Programs TOC Affordability” document through more holes than IJN Yamato off Okinawa. This was no baby-seals-type accident. It’s a deliberate hit at the highest level.
The key chart is page 10, which shows that – over the lifetime of the fleet – the carrier-based and STOVL JSF versions will cost the Navy 40 per cent more, in total operating costs, than the F/A-18C/Ds and AV-8Bs that they replace. (The older aircraft costs are taken from FY2008 and include a lot of aging-aircraft issues.) This is despite a smaller fleet and fewer flight hours: the new aircraft are expected to cost more than 60 per cent more to fly per hour than their predecessors.
The Navy report suggests that the total cost of the Pentagon’s JSF program will be $705 billion in FY2002 dollars, just over twice the figure predicted at the program’s inception.
Lockheed Martin and the JSF program office will respond that the Navy figures are conjectural, based on experience with legacy aircraft, and not applicable to the JSF’s cutting-edge technology. This matters not a hoot. What matters is that the admirals and senior Navy leaders believe the report is roughly accurate, or it wouldn’t be on the street in the first place.
So where are all those billions in extra O&S money going to come from? The answer is “nowhere”. When the report states that “JSF will have a significant impact on naval aviation affordability”, what it means by “significant” is “about the same as the ten torpedo and seven bomb hits on Yamato.”
But wait – there’s more. The Navy is not talking exclusively about the F-35B/C. If similar TOC comparisons hold for the F-16, USAF TacAir plans have some challenges ahead. Moreover, the Navy notes an “upward” pressure on the $705 billion – indicating that the program team will be doing well to hold it level.
The Navy is the only US JSF customer with a ready Plan B, in the shape of the Super Hornet. (And GE has developed a thrust boost for the F414 and Boeing has muttered quietly about stealth enhancements.) What would the Navy do about the Marines? That wasn’t in the report’s terms of reference.
The Navy is not identifying factors behind the per-hour TOC number. However, the JSF is Super Hornet-sized, and bigger than either of the aircraft it replaces. The F-35B includes a complex lift-system full of critical components. And JSF includes stealth technology, which has yet to prove as affordable in service as the engineers promised it would be.
No one presentation or study is definitive, but this latest disclosure places more pressure than ever on the JSF program to perform.
Ares
mattUpgrade of P-3C
Lockheed Martin Delivers First Two Upgraded P-3C Maritime Surveillance Aircraft for Pakistan
(Source: Lockheed Martin; issued January 14, 2010)
Lockheed has delivered the first two of seven upgraded P-3C maritime surveillance aircraft to the US Navy for delivery to Pakistan under the Foreign Military Sales program. (LM photo)EAGAN, Minn. — Lockheed Martin recently delivered two of seven upgraded P-3C maritime surveillance aircraft for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan under the U.S. Government’s Foreign Military Sales program.
The most recent aircraft delivery occurred on Jan. 7 to the Naval Air Station in Jacksonville, Fla., for subsequent transfer to Pakistan. Lockheed Martin delivered the first plane in October 2009.
Lockheed Martin is upgrading the P-3Cs’ aircraft and mission systems and providing maintenance under a 2006 contract from the U.S. Navy’s Naval Air Systems Command. The aircraft support anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare missions and will enhance Pakistan’s ability to conduct maritime surveillance in littoral and deep-water environments. The aircraft are designed to have a single integrated tactical picture of the battle space, drawing upon data from aircraft sensors and information from other platforms.
“These aircraft incorporate a variety of enhanced features including communications, electro-optic and infrared systems, data management, controls and displays, mission computers and acoustic processing,” said Mike Fralen, director for Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Sensors’ maritime surveillance programs.The P-3 is the primary maritime patrol and reconnaissance aircraft operated by the U.S. Navy and 16 allied countries. Its roles include anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, surveillance and reconnaissance, search and rescue, drug interdiction, economic zone patrol, airborne early warning and electronic warfare.
Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security company that employs about 140,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The corporation reported 2008 sales of $42.7 billion.
-ends-
matt
I found the real PAK FA!!!
mattThe AD-1 and AD-2 are no secret. India is developing ABM to destroy BM upto 250 km altitude and satellites upto 800 km. The ABM system includes multiple mini kill vehicles to counter MIRVs. As well as air-borne laser. So what secret left there? :rolleyes:
Any links to an Indian Airborne Laser ? Would be interested to read more about it.
Its not KALI is it?
mattOne of the Variants of the Brahmos can attack land targets however so can one of the varients of the S-N-27/P-900.
It would not be a big suprise if we found out that the Brahmos JV actually used seekers from the S-N-27..
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMRUS_ASHmis.htm
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/alfa.htm
http://www.aviation.ru/Missiles/
There is also nothing unique about the seeker in the Brahmos land attack cruise missile see links above. The technology pre existed.
If the Brahmos is using GPS and it is one of the reasons for its accurasy it is an achilese heal and a relatively easy one for an well armed foe to take advantage off.
Sign In
