dark light

Fedaykin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 4,531 through 4,545 (of 5,046 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: CVF News #2076710
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Commercial ship building is also in major trouble in most other Western European companies, costs are just not competitive with countries like South Korea and China, Germany tried to bridge the gap by relying on cheap Eastern European labour and major cost cutting but saw build quality collapse as a result and german built ships are no longer the high quality “gold standard” of commercial shipping they once were. The UK can support one or two surface yards for warships and a submarine yard, but that’s about it realistically. This is made more complex by the fact that the government is still trying to spread the money around their own favoured constituencies which is screwing everybody (why is Rosyth still getting so much work when they decided it was one of the bases/yards they’d close in the mid 90’s precisely to give the survivors a fighting chance of a long term future? What lunatic decided Swan Hunter could be lead contractor on the LSD(A) program?) for cheap vote grabbing in the short term. Astute had horrific problems in the early days and those problems have badly hit the budget for follow on boats. The build quality of the Type 45 does show a good improvement over some recent warships however and seems a pretty sound design.

    Hit it on the head there Turbina, it gets even worse with Hyundai offering Corvettes, Frigates and Destroyers.

    The whole Rosyth thing is silly considering they will have to spend lots of money expanding the yard for the one off CVF contract when Harland and Wolfe have a basin big enough to do the job.

    in reply to: CVF News #2076749
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    The problem is UK yards unlike ones in other countries (France, Germany and Spain for example) don’t get orders for large civilian ships like container ships, cruise liners and tankers.

    With the trickle of millitary orders its hardly surprising that UK yards are not competative.

    Swann Hunter are more than capable of making Frigates and small vessels but the ALSL order was just too much. I have a hunch that if Swann Hunter had been recieving regular orders for Ferries and cargo ships over the last thirty years the ALSL order would of presented few problems for them and easily come in under budget.

    With under investment, lack of government support and unions not realising the consequences of their actions its hardly surprising that British ship building is in ruins.

    in reply to: Video of Land Phalanx taking out bombs and mortar rounds. #1805622
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    For the US Army the Phalanx is an affordable (read cheap) off the shelf solution.

    It utilises spare explosive ammunition left over from the retired Vulcan system and an automated quick reaction capability combined with a high cyclical rate making it a desirable solution.

    in reply to: Harrier GR7/9 Air to Air #2519016
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the RN/RAF have played around with the idea of using the GR.7/9 in the air combat role.

    Its wired for Sidewinder and if the panic button was hit ASRAAM wouldn’t be too great an integration issue considering its designed to ue the same rails and interface connectors.

    I suspect any use of the G.R7/9 would involve GCI from the ASaC.7 or ships in the task group placing the Harrier in a position to get a shot off. Not exactly ideal but better than nothing. There are enough ex Sea Harrier pilots trained in fleet GCI and ACM to make it a workable solution.

    in reply to: The 8000t "harrier carrier" concept? #2077777
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Hi tiddles!

    All right?

    I very much hope that CVF will one day enter Portsmouth Harbour and I hope that I will still live and have time to sit in the pub at the harbour entrance. Well I hope it will be overcrowded by members of this and other boards 😉

    shiplover

    Thats one drink I would be happy to join you on shiplover!

    in reply to: 727 dirt strip take off #600285
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Anyone notice that she starts her takeoff run going own hill and ends it going up hill!

    in reply to: RAF A330`s #2522822
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    An utter farce from start to finish! (well its not finished actually)

    All because the government wanted to avoid a large up front payment, thats what PFI is all about! The only problem is whilst it appears cheaper at first the through life costs are crazy.

    I’m glad that they at least purchased the C17 outright in the end.

    The RAF needs new tankers urgently and if the government stopped messing arround with PFI industry could provide fairly quickly.

    Fedaykin
    Participant

    The UK has retired all the Sea Harriers, so the sale of Invincible will not cause Sea Harriers to come onto the market. The RAFs Harriers are being rebuilt to GR.9 standard to extend their lives. They’re expected to be run on until worn out, then scrapped. In the meantime, we have no spare Harriers. The retired Sea Harriers are being offered for sale without radars & some other equipment, which is why India rejected them, deciding it wasn’t worthwhile to refit them. By the time Invincible is sold, they’ll probably have been scrapped.

    The only possible source of secondhand Harriers is the USMC, & I’m not sure any of their AV-8Bs will be worth buying. They’ll be old & well-used, & Harriers have a hard life.

    Exactly the problem for any prospective purchaser of Invinceable and her sisters. I doubt there will be any suitable Harriers to make up a fixed wing element to their air group. All the present Harrier users intend to replace them with a different type, either the F-35 or in India’s case the Mig-29. Whilst you could operate an F-35 from an Invinceable class carrier there isn’t much room for a sizeable air group and I wonder if countries that would be interested in Invinceable could afford them.

    in reply to: Sea stories from the Cold War. . . #2079131
    Fedaykin
    Participant
    in reply to: Sea stories from the Cold War. . . #2079227
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    My fave cold war story is when the old Ark Royal ran over a Russian frigate.

    in reply to: Article on Hizbollah ASM strike on INS Hanit #2079451
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Does anyone have pictures from the interview which showed the missile being fired? Thus far, I have not seen any compelling evidence that the missile involved was a C802. The fact that the corvette hit did not sink (or rather, was not blown out of the water, literally) also makes it pretty unlikely that a missile of the C802’s weight class hit the ship itself. From everything I have read so far, a hit from the much smaller, but externally similar C701 optical guided missile seems to fit the facts better.

    The only likely scenario I can see where a corvette can survive a C802 hit is if the missile did not hit the ship itself, but rather detonated close to the ship. Since the Barat system was turned off, the missile must have struck. Although it is possible that the stealthy design of the ship confused the missile seeker, thus the missile locked onto and hit the helo on deck instead of the ship itself. But then, an IR seeker could just as likely have locked onto the helo if it was on standby and had its engine running.

    Does anyone know if the helo was on deck or in the hanger at the time and what state of readiness it is in?

    I did read in one of the British aviation magazines (not one of Keypublishing’s i think) that the missile hit a crane on the helicopter deck. This would match the scenario of a close detonation of a C802.

    I personally think the C701 was the culprit it fits into the local picture far better than the C802:

    Its smaller making it far easier to conceal and deploy.

    It has an IR seeker option thus avoiding the deployment of radars.

    Its licence built in Iran.

    In all respects the C701 is a more suitable system for an organisation like Hezbollah who haven’t got the resources to support a large complicated weapon system like C802.

    in reply to: Argentina / Russia defence pact #2530590
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    I’m waiting for the Photoshop crowd to knock up a Su30MK in Argentine colours…. 😀

    in reply to: Argentina / Russia defence pact #2530650
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    Right. Anyway, it is still a very interesting shift to eastern hardware which could pretty much indicate the future replacement of the old A-4s and Mirage III/V/Nesher/Dagger combo. I still think we might see Flankers in Argie colors one day and it has nothing to do with one’s wet dreams (that would be the FAA Rafale).

    Nope haven’t had any wet dreams about the Rafale :p

    Maybe the English Electric Lightning or the FGR1 Phantom.

    in reply to: Argentina / Russia defence pact #2530720
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    The only reference to Flankers was when one of the members cooked up a wet dream !!

    Yep my wet dream :diablo:

    Just making a speculative comment really…nothing to take seriously. I’m quite interested in the Argentine MOD’s decision making processes. The only concrete thing we have had is a requirement for helicopters, fighters were mentioned by the Russians as part of a package they have offered to Argentina. Sounds like the Russians threw in the Fighter’s to see if the Argentine air force would take a nibble.

    in reply to: Argentina / Russia defence pact #2531379
    Fedaykin
    Participant

    You mean THOSE navalized Typhoons? :confused: Fleet Air Arm do not even field a true fighter today… 😉 Last time I checked there were no Typhoons on Mount Pleasant.

    All in good time.

    Its barely into RAF service yet and I would of thought that it would be a bit down the pecking order when it comes to where it will based.

Viewing 15 posts - 4,531 through 4,545 (of 5,046 total)