dark light

Fedaykin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 3,466 through 3,480 (of 5,046 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: PLAAF; News and Photos volume 13 #2442215
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Oh on antoher note it does rather look like a turbofan Antonov AN70 or is that just me?

    in reply to: PLAAF; News and Photos volume 13 #2442216
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2009/11/long-waited-chinese-heavy-military.html

    I know that D30KP turbofan is in PLAAF service but I do find it a rather bemusing interim choice considering there are better engines available like the PS90 or CFM56.

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2016851
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Anyway, I wonder if there are any fresh pictures out there of the Varyag?

    The pattern always seems to be a flurry of pictures then nothing for 6 to 8 months then another flurry of pictures.

    in reply to: The RAF is dead, long live the RAF #2443977
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    A lot of the problems with Collins are the fault of the swedes at kockums. They basically scaled up the gotland class, which cause all sorts of problems. The Americans had to be called in to help fix the design problems. All the previous problems were sorted out, and now apparrently the diesel engines are messed up. Honestly no idea who chose that particular make of engine.

    That is fairly unfair to Kockums, the Australian requirement was for a unique design.

    Every company that tendered a solution didn’t meet the basic RAN design specification and had to ammend their offerings. When it came to equipment like the combat data system Australia again specified for a unique solution that was outdated when it actually entered service.

    Many of the issues related to the Collins class directly relate to the RAN specification and the pix and mix nature of the submarine. Australia wanted a large Diesel submarine with much of the capability of a Nuclear submarine with unique systems fitted…hardly surprising there were problems!

    in reply to: Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle #2017105
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    On the contrary, you are really underestimating the RN’s amphibious capability. Remeber we retook the Falklands with far less capable ships. Also, I made no reference to either V-22s or LCACs, neither of which figure in the RN’s plans currently due to their cost. Without LCACs, the well deck can only be used whilst stationary, hence it is only a feature of second wave RN amphibs. First wave goes by air, Junglies currently (Sea King HC4/HAS6C).

    The older US concept of the LHD is one even they are moving away from with the new America class. Yes using a CVF in the LPH role is less cost effective than a purpose built design, but it makes use of an asset that is then kept available for use in it’s primary role at short notice. A replacement for Ocean appears to be deferred at the moment (though the ship herself can be extended to cover the gap) so it makes sense to get more use out of the carriers, just as we do now with the CVSs. Carriers are not single role ships anyway, they are flexible air power projection platforms and always have been. I think it is possible that there may be a reciprocal arrangement in the middle of the next decade whereby France builds a couple of modified Mistrals (minus the well deck) for the RN, and in return we build PA2 (at least as far as the fitting out stage) for the MN. They have a ‘production line’ for Mistrals and we have a ‘production line’ for the CVFs (being set up as we speak). The current warship building plans for the RN aren’t based upon the maximum shipyard capacity, but the minimum sustainable capacity. Extra orders can be accomodated…

    Obi Wan is right, if the Falklands hadn’t happened the UK would have virtually no amphibious assault capability now.

    Instead the UK has an ability to conduct and support amphibious assaults second only to the USN now:

    2 x Albion class

    Hms Ocean

    HMS Illustrious and HMS Ark Royal in secondary LPH role

    4 x Bay Class (These are better and more numerous navies have globally let alone a reserve)

    RFA Argus

    RFA Diligence

    Point class

    Plus the Tankers and Fort class

    The problem the RN has with the sea blind nature of recent governments is the cut down of the frigate and destroyer fleet tasked with protecting all this equipment plus the constant threat over the CVF program and the Harrier/F35 required to give air cover over any amphibious fleet.

    in reply to: Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle #2017649
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    The OSD for Tornado GR4 is said by the MOD to be 2025. Since they will not all be retired at once, & orders for replacements should be placed some time before they start retiring, there may not be (depending on total Typhoon production) any gap at all. Tranche 3A deliveries are scheduled to end in 2016. Tranche 3B could extend that, Indian or more Saudi orders could extend it. We don’t know yet.

    We may get some UCAVs by 2025, to replace the last Tornado GR4s. With Taranis set to fly next year, early 2020s looks quite achievable.

    Indeed that is what I have heard, for that matter the RAF is rather loath to loose the deep strike capability the GR4 offers. The Typhoon is very good but there are certain things the GR4 does better and cheaper! I have heard that their is some internal argument within the RAF to keep the GR4 beyond 2030 hence the desire to fit it with an AESA radar and other toys.

    To many in the RAF who are still upset over the loss of FOAS the F35A or C would be the only suitable replacement for GR4.

    in reply to: Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle #2017856
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    In my opinion if the RAF is going all Typhoon 50 dedicated JSF is more then the navy were expecting and clearly they were planing to rotate QE and PoW anyway with a surge capability.

    With MPA the RN doesn’t have to worry about a Falklands two and during peace time QE and PoW were never going to operate with a full airgroup of 36. I see no more then twelve at a time as a usual fit…

    Its going to take year for Lock Mart to deliver the F35B to the US Marines, Italy, Spain, the RN and Possibly the USAF so the line’s (don’t forget Italy) will certainly be open well into the 2020’s and further allowing the RN time to husband funds and buy a few more

    in reply to: Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle #2017884
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Actually on another note if the RAF are going to streamline onto a Typhoon only force it means no more stupid joint force Harrier/Lightning meaning an independant Fleet air arm.

    I bet the RN will be happy getting all the aircraft especially as the F35 will be in production for a long time allowing them to wait for better times and this diabolical sea blind government to be long gone to get extra airframes.

    If they are talking about a full airgroup of 36 that leaves 14 for training and maintenance. Considering that during peace time that the air group will probably be half that there is no reason why they couldn’t stand up F35 on both carriers anyway say 12 a piece.

    No I think the RN are playing a clever waiting game with this one, the contract is too far gone and solid to cancel the second carrier and there isn’t going to be much cost difference completing the contracted design as F35 capable.

    in reply to: Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle #2017889
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Yep this isn’t as bad as it seems, the navy gets both hulls which is the real victory.

    The reality the RN would of only operated enough at one time to operate from one carrier anyway. Wait two or three governments to around 2025 and extra F35 can be tagged onto production and you will probably even get RAF support as the GR4 will need replacing by then.

    in reply to: Helicopter question #2413331
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Apologies, wrongly worded question, it should have been:

    Would it have performed better with a fenestron?

    Regards.

    Unlikely considering that a Fenestron is only an enclosed tail rotor.

    Sure you don’t mean a NOTAR?

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2018666
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    ok any chance that this could just be a crazy ass museum or something. Go up top and see great planes and feel like your on a carrier.

    Another version of the concrete nimitz

    No I don’t think so, it doesn’t look like a theme park. Why replicate the Varyag’s deck and bridge layout so accurately but retain the look of building lower down?

    The latest pictures taken from the bridge are amazing! It really looks like you are on a real aircraft carrier! No the PLAN are up to something…

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2019166
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    any ideas….

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1471872&postcount=224

    Well you couldn’t fly off it, look at the safety fence around the edge and how close the top floor windows are to the deck.

    A very clever idea! Looks like a deck handling training facility, classrooms can be in the building and anybody standing on the roof will get the feeling of being up on a carrier deck.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion III #2433471
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    What an awesome pic

    http://forceindia.net/images/Apr-2008-cov.jpg

    I must admit I quite fancy seeing an Indian airforce line up of their IL76, C130J and if purchased C17.

    That would be cool….

    Throw in the a330mrtt which looks a dead cert and they will have an excellent medium to heavy transport capability.

    I think the Indian airforce should look at upgrading the current IL76/78 fleet with Perm PS90 to bring it inline with the AEW fleet as well.

    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion III #2433475
    Fedaykin
    Participant
    in reply to: MMRCA News and Discussion III #2433477
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Besides, I can’t understand what the A-12 had in relation to F-18 E/F’s development. From whatever I’ve read, A-12 was a reconnaissance jet like SR-71 Blackbird.

    ?

    Ah well there are actually more then one A-12’s out there!

    The A-12 your thinking about is the CIA requested Lockheed Skunkworks developed spy plane:

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/A12-flying.jpg

    Pfcem is talking about the cancelled General Dynamics A-12 Avenger program that was going to produce a replacement for the A6 intruder:

    http://www.mooneyland.com/avenger_a12.jpg

    Alas it was cancelled during development leading to an updated version of the Hornet being persued eventually becoming the Super Hornet.

Viewing 15 posts - 3,466 through 3,480 (of 5,046 total)