Wouldn’t that careless application of ye official mark adversely affect the COG??????
A well presented piece of research but with a bit of a mis-statement at the start. There was no such thing as a Bristol Thunderbird. T-bird was a product of the Guided Weapons Division of English Electric Aviation and while it was indeed more conventional with its cruciform wing layout, it certainly was not closely related to Bloodhound. Apart from the obvious differences in power and control, there was great competitive animosity between the two teams. (I should know; I was an aerodynamicist on the EE side based at Luton and then at the GW wind tunnel at Warton.)
Lol, terribly sorry, goes to show the dangers of internet research. I’ll amend it :). Can you tell us more about the two missiles, differences and similarities etc – they used the same boosters- or is that just the fins misleading me.
Something else I don’t think I touched on adequately was the differences in Bloodhound MkI and Bloodhound MkII sites – which are evident from the satellite imagery.
But how big a factor is stealth?
I can understand ‘major’ air forces going for relatively long range offensive capable multi-role aircraft. But there are many other countries who don’t share this need, have relatively few pilots and cannot afford the likes of the F-35.
Take Lithuania, Syria, Taiwan, Kuwait as diverse examples. There is clearly still a market for single/limited role combat aircraft.
Of course none of the real-life options fit my conception, but is there logic to the low-cost stealth point air-defence fighter?
I think stealth is a major factor here – even a small number of radar stealthy aircraft can (I suspect) have a disproportionate effect on the enemy in a defensive scenario. You can imagine an enemy chasing shadows and being more jumpy than faced with equivalent non-stealthy threat.
And size can’t be that much of a factor; there have been several stealthy aircraft built this size, indeed much smaller.
and Anglesey to whoever takes a fancy to it?
Moggy
We tried but no-one wanted it.
My understanding is that the top North Korean midget sub you posted is not a Sang-O but a P-14, very similar to the Iranian Ghadir class.
My illustration of the P-4:
The lower one is the Sang-O not a “Yugo”.
And lastly a typical Yugo boat – a bit sketchy on the details this one.
Note that the drawings aren’t to scale; the Sang-O is the biggest of the three and the Yugo the smallest.
Moe info following internet research: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread285661/pg
If anyone can correct my drawings and research I’d be very chuffed. Thanks.
During a visit to Iran, DPRK bigwig Kim announced that NKorea will deliver 4 unspecified midget subs to Iran this year. My guess is P-4 type. Also possibly one recently retired “medium sized submarine” – my guess a Sang-O.
(Kyodo)
4/7/07North Korea has agreed to supply four mini-submarines to Iran by mid-July, raising the level of alert in neighboring countries, a diplomatic source said Wednesday.
The agreement was reached when North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Yong Il made a visit to Iran in May, the source familiar with relations between Tehran and Pyongyang told Kyodo News.The arms deal was part of North Korea’s repaying debts owed to Iran, amounting to several hundred million dollars, the source said.
Details about the deal such as specific types of the submarines and ways to transport them were not available.
“During the visit of Kim Yong Il in Iran, it was agreed that North Korea would deliver 4 mini-submarines to Iran within the next two months, not later than July 15 this year,” the source said.
The source raised concerns that Iran may mobilize the North Korean-made submarines near the Strait of Hormuz and may pose threats to naval vessels deployed by the United States.
During his stay in Iran, Kim met with senior officials, including Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and First Vice President Parviz Davudi, the source said.
In addition, Kim also promised to consider supplying a midsize submarine retired by the North Korean navy a year and a half ago, according to the source.
Moreover, two senior officials of a company affiliated with the North Korean military also gave detailed descriptions of arms that could be immediately supplied, such as antitank missiles, and a senior official of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard was present.
Meanwhile, North Korea and Iran are believed to have cooperative ties in the military sector with Pyongyang exporting components related to ballistic missiles to Iran since 1980s and Tehran passing data on missile tests to North Korea.
Go Europe! Go Europe! Go Europe!
Lol, looks like a good design and cheaper is better. I’m still saddened that Horizon wasn’t selected (it wasn’t even entered???) as it would have met RANs needs in my eyes and offers evolutions to VL-MICA, Davide, Storm Shadow etc.
I think Rafale is the best fighter they could go for, but MiG-29K is always a dark horse option.
What I think they really need is 4-6 air defence destroyers, maybe Horizons or something.
I just read that Malaysia has selected the ESSM for its follow-on batch of BAE Systems light Frigates. Replaces the Sea Wolf VLS on the first batch.
Obviously ESSM is far geater ranged, and politics may play a part in it. BUT, how come MBDA weren’t able to give a home advantage to their own products in this order?
Like MICA-VL, Aster-15 or whatever? Surely both are arguably superior to the ESSM anyway?
I haven’t heard anything. Even if something so much as a rifle shot had been fired between ships, it should have been on the news. I don’t see anything.
Anything I’ve heard that might be remotely related is the news that the PKX-A, the first of the next-generation fast-attack missile boats, will be named Yoon Young Ha. The official news was released yesterday.
This is a significant statement against North Korea. Lt. Commander Yoon Young Ha was the commander of the Chamsuri-357, which was involved in the naval engagement 5 years ago. He and 5 others lost their lives in the engagement when the Chamsuri 357 was sunk.
PKX-A will be launched in the 28th of this month, a day before the 5th anniversary of the West Sea engagement with the families of the fallen in attendance.
Any images or specs for the PKX-As?
I remember watching A-10s flying extremely low over UK on hundreds of occassions back in the late 1980s/early 90s. They always struck me as VERY slow and cumbersome relative to the Harrier GR3s/GR5s, Tornados, Jaguars and such flying at same altitude. F-111s and F-15Es rarely came that low though, but French Mirage 2000Ns did and they were also pretty slow down around the tree tops.
A10 really didn’t look very impressive to be honest. And the way they banked all the time just made them look like huge targets for AAA and SA-6s.
No one able to give me a quick lesson in transonics as they relate to the HY-7/Styx/Ra’ad? 🙁
No 😀 Its the new SSBN. Probably the 094 (Jin)
It seems a bit small if you ask me.
From Hui Tong:
Is that the new midget submarine?:confused:
The OTO-Melara super-rapid I mentioned is only 76mm so maybe not in the framing of this thread.
But comparing the worth of a (conceptual) large MRLS versus a typical 100-130mm naval gun for shore bombardment is well worth it. Obviously the naval gun would have more rounds for a given magazine volume, but the range and throw-weight of the rockets would be in a completely different league. Chinese navy have played with SMERCH rockets for this sort of thing and Germans toyed with the idea but I guess money nipped that in the bud.