Page 55 – Key Publishing

Fedaykin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 811 through 825 (of 5,046 total)

← 1 2 3 … 54 55 56 … 335 336 337 →

Author

Posts
July 20, 2013 at 12:20 am in reply to: Future RAF – Mixed Fighter Force re born #2273251

Fedaykin
Participant

Im confused as to why it is being suggested a hawk couldnt intercept an airliner could you expand on why that might be the case.
As you identified my question was based on the premise that this is in fact a model previously used based on things that i have read so its an interesting suggestion this may not have been the case

Well unfortunately it is simple math, unless it is a regional airliner travelling low and slow a Hawk hasn’t got a chance of doing a visual intercept on a transiting airliner when you look at the relative performance. A Hawk has a straight and level top speed of Mach 0.84 and a ceiling of approximately 45 thousand feet, a Boeing 777 will cruise at 35 thousand feet at Mach 0.84. A Hawk can’t climb at Mach 0.84 so when the call comes in a Hawk has no chance of getting out of the Q shed, off the runway and up to 35 thousand feet before the airliner is long gone. Other airliners like the 747 have even faster cruise speeds, there is no way a subsonic jet can hope to catch with an airliner unless they have warning and can get ahead of the flight profile which is rather unlikely. There have been a few recent incidents where Typhoon have been scrambled to do visual intercept of airliners that were not transmitting or where there was a worrying passenger on-board. In each case the Typhoon had to request permission to go supersonic over land to catch up with the airliner in question. In an air to air scenario the Hawk can at best be a point defence fighter operating over its launch airfield and awaiting targets to come to it. People often think airliners are slow bus like things but actually when they are operating at cruise altitude they are pretty fast, in theory many could actually break the sound barrier in a shallow dive if allowed. The Douglas DC-8 has even broken the sound barrier and is the first civil airliner to do it beating the Tu-144 and Concord! (Still waiting for that nugget to come up in a pub quiz :very_drunk:) Picture below is of the Canadian Pacific DC-8 that did it with an F-104 piloted by Chuck Yeager as the chase plane!

http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/I-Was-There-Boeing-Will-Never-Try-It.html#

July 19, 2013 at 7:31 pm in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2273427

Fedaykin
Participant

To be honest it was quite a funny joke on Y-20’s part in respect of JSR and his Mig-29 obsession.

The heat must be getting to us all.

July 19, 2013 at 4:45 pm in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2273532

Fedaykin
Participant

To be fair on reflection I should of said “One of the best M-SCAN” but general industry consensus is for an M-SCAN fighter radar CAPTOR is pretty much the best to be found out there.

JSR debating tactic 101:
so F-35B procurement budget will come from some where else. you didnot see IHS report that India budget will be larger than UK in couple of years. and that budget is already tiny.

Oh I also forgot one of the things to laugh about JSR, his classic debating tactic of switching to an entirely unrelated subject then vehemently defending said switch as relevant. At first it was irritating, then it became boring now I just laugh! :very_drunk:

July 19, 2013 at 4:20 pm in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2273544

Fedaykin
Participant

his posts are mere conjectures. not anything to do with reality. no one can make claim like best M scan radar etc.

Oh dear oh dear is the little boy upset. Considering you have shown almost zero knowledge on any subject related to aviation I think I can live with that little dig. Considering that you live in a fantasy world I have a hunch that I have a far better grip on reality. How many of your pronouncements been proven utterly and comically wrong! Lets see shall we dig a few up so we an have a laugh at you again hmmm.

JSR: Strike aircraft need widely spaced engines and a fuselage spine to be truly effective. Oh how we laughed!

JSR: Europe has a secret arms embargo against Iraq. Almost face palm stupid considering all those rather inconvenient European equipment orders.

JSR: Airbus and Boeing civil airline sales will collapse in the face of Russian competition. Almost prolapsed that was so funny.

JSR: Admiral Gorshkov refit is a good example of a well planned and budgeted program. ROFL!

I see you have added some new ones for our entertainment!

JSR: Stormshadow is old. Really?! One of the latest Cruise missiles on the market.

Keep on your drivel entertains us all.

July 19, 2013 at 4:13 pm in reply to: Future RAF – Mixed Fighter Force re born #2273547

Fedaykin
Participant

You haven’t answered why you think a single seater sub-sonic point defence fighter will be of any use to the UK andyk68. As for helping our industrial base fact is the Hawk 200 was never the sales success that was hoped for how would that change. Buying a Hawk 200 variant draws funding away from other programs and gives the UK a type that is only useful in a narrow set of circumstances. Fitting an uprated Adour is not going to give the performance you are hoping for within the fatigue restraints of the airframe.

It can’t intercept transiting airliners, it can’t get to an intercept point for any probing Russian aircraft until they are well inside our ADZ or well on their way home.

Contrary to popular belief the Hawk T1A that you mentioned at the start of the thread were not adopted to act in a Hi-Lo mix with the Phantom and Tornado albeit the impression was certainly given in a few magazines and books. The Sidewinder wired T1A were purchased to replace the Hunter’s of the RAF’s Tactical Weapons Unit, 89 airframes were wired for AIM-9L and ADEN gun pods. They are also the type used by the Red Arrows with a dummy gun pod carrying the display smoke oil. The idea of the TWU was to do weapons and tactics training on a cheaper type before new pilots proceeded to the Lightning/Phantom/Jaguar/Harrier/Buccaneer/Tornado OCU. In theory in the event of WWIII the Hawk T1A would be pressed into service as point defence fighters.

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1979/1979%20-%200481.html

If your argument is based on supporting British industry then I would strongly argue bringing forward another order of Hawk T.2 would far better serve our needs then a Hawk 200 variant.

July 19, 2013 at 12:59 pm in reply to: Future RAF – Mixed Fighter Force re born #2273590

Fedaykin
Participant

Its an interesting assertion that the LO element of a fighter force could be the F35 given its costs and technologies which suggests some challenges for deployed ops (one of the reasons the Jaguar was asigned to rapid deployment was its relative simplicity to maintain in the field.
And having a fleet that consists of premium cost resources naturally means that the numbers which are affordable is low.
The idea of using Grippen as the low complement of this force may be a suitable alternative to Hawk 200 variant.
But as previously stated deploying a Hawk 200 variant must be cheaper than a pure Typhoon/f35 fleet and I dont see wht this aircraft would not be a useful resource for the asymmetric warfare that we have seen recently.
Options could include looking at installing radars from ex sea harrier fa2s into these aircraft (im hoping these werent just scrapped with the aircraft!) And if performance is a concern then surely the upgraded adours from the jag fleet could be re used.
Pilot conversion training should be cheap being a variant of hawk T2
And this is on the basis that ucavs just arent going to be ready to undertake this role for quite some time yet, after all tthe Germans have just cancelled a major drone program due to issues with getting certification for these devices to fly in european air space!

Even with an uprated engine a Hawk 200 variant would still be a subsonic point defence fighter. It couldn’t intercept a transiting airliner not transmitting or get out to a Russian bomber probing our ADZ quick enough. Using it for asymmetric warfare is interesting and it is worth noting that at least one senior army officer argued for bombed up Tucano for Afghanistan operations. Problem is as an idea a Hawk 200 for Afghanistan CAS is too late, the draw down is ongoing and the in theatre assets are adequate. Buying a Hawk 200 for variant for a possible future conflict like that is a waste of money. Diverting funds to buy Hawk 200 takes it away from Typhoon, F-35B and the future UCAV. There is no spare pot of money to buy the type you are arguing for and it offers too little to make it a worthwhile exercise.

The Blue Vixen radar have been sitting in some warehouse for a number of years now (if they haven’t already been broken up) with no maintenance. To integrate them on Hawk would cost big bucks if it was possible at all and give a radar that is the state of the art in the late 1980’s. It would probably be easier and cheaper to integrate a new radar (something like the Selex Vixen 500E would be logical) then mess around trying to shoehorn in Blue Vixen. Again that takes scarce funds away from other critical programs.

It is interesting to note that the Czech Republic did exactly what you are suggesting with the L159 ALCA, a very nice aircraft with some very useful capabilities but many have been mothballed as they are just too limited in capability and a drain on funds. Personally I think there was a market for them in certain countries (NewZealand for example) but in the end they have been a costly problem for the Czech.

Finally as alluded to by EElightning we have or will have assets very well suited to Asymmetric operations the Raptor drones and the future UCAV. Spending money on a combat Hawk variant again drains funding from those useful types for something that is of far less use.

Now don’t get me wrong I think more Hawk trainers should be purchased in the 2015 to 2020 timeframe to allow retirement of the Hawk T.1 but a combat Hawk is a silly waste of limited resources.

July 18, 2013 at 11:38 pm in reply to: Future RAF – Mixed Fighter Force re born #2273756

Fedaykin
Participant

Fact is in the past the UK operated a number of different types all dedicated to fairly narrowly defined roles. I suppose the one exception to that was the F-4 Phantom but even then in its later years the RAF stripped it of roles until it was purely operating in the intercept role. The luxury of operating two dedicated CAS types the Jaguar and Harrier. Two penetration strike types Buccaneer and Tornado. Three dedicated interceptors Tornado, Phantom and BAC lightning are all gone. The UK can afford two swing role types Typhoon and F-35B. Those two types will be pressed into whatever tasking is required of them. F-35B is NOT being purchased purely for the carriers, it is being purchased as a swing role type that can deploy to the carriers if needed. The RAF and FAA will operate them in a common pool from the same base and whilst I am certain for tradition some will be painted in 617 colours and some will be painted in 800/801 NAS colours that won’t actually reflect the day to day tasking of the airframes. You might well have an FAA pilot on a Monday flying an F-35B with 617 colours and an RAF pilot flying one with NAS colours on a Tuesday. This will be done to normalise airframe life and is already fairly normal practice.

July 18, 2013 at 12:09 pm in reply to: QEC Construction #1998721

Fedaykin
Participant

Some nice new pictures on the flickr stream, one thing I am pondering. Who is making the Ski Jump?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/qeclasscarriers/9296530687/

July 18, 2013 at 12:06 pm in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2274054

Fedaykin
Participant

C’mon don’t sit on the fence tell us what you really think..

Cheers

😎

July 18, 2013 at 11:08 am in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2274091

Fedaykin
Participant

I have to disagree with you on that one. JSR definitely has a point…

It is not about whether the engine meets performance requirements or about whether the radar is good per se. It surely is, that is no question here.
The point is the hardware is roughly as good or as bad as it was from the very beginning. The addition of Pirate, integration of few LGB types or bolt-on connections to CFT do not substantiate the highly increased price compared to the one from ten years ago.

Resorting to personal attacks because someone does not appreciate your favorite aircraft as much as you would like him to is childish enough, IMHO. Let’s keep it polite, gents.

Firstly I didn’t quibble the price point if you look at my reply. I agree it has cost waaaaaay more then it should of and I personally think Germany has to carry a significant amount of the blame for that.

Secondly the Typhoon isn’t my personal favourite aircraft. This isn’t fanboyism.

Thirdly, JSR made it childishly personal long ago! His ignorant fanboyish “Russia RAH RAH RAH” comments and utterly ignorant postings have disrupted this forum for way to long and as the moderators won’t ban him I see no problem in being openly contemptuous of his contributions. He has been ripped to pieces repeatedly with his ideas on aerodynamics, technology and global economics by many a good forum member. If he is going to continue wasting our time I am happy pointing out his ignorance.

JSR is not here for reasoned debate, he is here to troll the forum and rub every-bodies noses in his ideas of the Glorious Russia!

July 18, 2013 at 9:36 am in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2274117

Fedaykin
Participant

You lost me Tomcat

July 18, 2013 at 3:12 am in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2274165

Fedaykin
Participant

THere is no fundamental difference between Typhoon of today or Typhoon of 10 years ago.
No Engine upgrade
No CFT
No large Jamming pods
No AESA radar
Meteor not operationalized yet.
No carrier version.
huge increase in price. when customers buy it they simply dont have money for anything else.
See dispute on price of Saudi EF enhancement. Its failed programe as it is killing the airforces that buying it. A programe is not failed if it is cancelled early and concentrate on some thing better.

Oh dear, yet again you show your utter ignorance! Better clear up your sillyness…again!

No Engine upgrade

Engine is state of the art and meets all performance and reliability requirements for the Typhoon. Incremental upgrades are ongoing (and always have been). Performance growth variant in development.

No CFT

CFT fitment being trialled as I write this, tranche III airframes fitted with CFT mounting points as standard (see picture below).

No large Jamming pods

Your ignorance knows no bounds on this one and I have had good time laughing at your childish lack of knowledge. I only have to write one word “Praetorian” I rest my case!

No AESA radar

But the best M-SCAN radar in the world. You have been told a million times that the partner nations were happy with an M-SCAN radar. An AESA has been tested on Typhoon and the definitive AESA solution is being agreed on for Tranche III and possible retrofit to Tranche II. IPA5 has been fitted for testing with a Swash-plate AESA. See picture below.

Meteor not operationalized yet.

So what? It is operational with AMRAAM and METEOR is going through trials now on Typhoon, first launch in January. See video below.

huge increase in price.

Can’t argue with that…I blame the Germans personally 😉

when customers buy it they simply dont have money for anything else.

A statement not born out by real events or the procurement plans of the nations involved.

See dispute on price of Saudi EF enhancement.

There has been a dispute but it isn’t the disaster you make it to be. The issue is mainly related to the transfer of final assembly back to the UK.

Its failed programe as it is killing the airforces that buying it.

Unsubstantiated tosh! All the airforces that are buying Typhoon are not going anywhere and Typhoon will form the backbone of their fleets.

A programe is not failed if it is cancelled early and concentrate on some thing better.

And finally some random gibberish for our entertainment JSR.

Please do carry on we all enjoy laughing at you and your lack of rational knowledge.

July 17, 2013 at 6:43 pm in reply to: Future RAF – Mixed Fighter Force re born #2274315

Fedaykin
Participant

Whilst I feel there is a strong argument for more Hawk T.2 building up to the eventual retirement of the T.1 I see little need for a Hawk 200 fighter variant. The Phantom/Tornado/Hawk combination of the 80’s and early 90’s was interesting but frankly of little real use. You end up with what is at best a point defence fighter that can’t do much beyond defending local airfields and eats funding better used on the Typhoon and Lightning.

In what way is a mixed Typhoon and Lightning fighter force not a runner? That is what we are getting alongside a as of yet undefined UCAV. Both Typhoon and Lightning will have modern short, medium and long range air to air missiles. They will both have modern AESA and are swing role, fact is the days of having a type that is operated in a narrowly defined role is rapidly ending. Once Tornado is retired Typhoon and Lightning will perform Air-intercept, Air-superiority, reconnaissance, CAS and penetration strike depending on events. Inducting a sub-sonic point defence fighter is a waste of money.

Sorry to Poo Poo your idea but it is a wasteful concept.

July 15, 2013 at 4:41 pm in reply to: Canadian team looks at alternatives to CH-148 Cyclone! #2275054

Fedaykin
Participant

Yup, that sums it up exactly!
I really hate our form of goverment. Most of that was selected when we had a minority gov’t. The opposition stopped everything. Not that our majority has done better.

There were two naval yards awarded with multi billion dollar contracts, and they are still sitting there twittling thier thumbs.

A french FREMM class visited Canada recently, and our defence minister was very pleased with it. But that means nothing….

As far as I can see it Canada has got itself into a terrible situation of political point scoring and indecision. The irony is if they had actually adopted the EH101 it would of been in service for many years already, at a significantly lower cost then what is currently being spent on CH-148 and they probably would be approaching decision time for a mid life update.

July 15, 2013 at 4:33 pm in reply to: Canadian team looks at alternatives to CH-148 Cyclone! #2275073

Fedaykin
Participant

The reason I linked it to the CH-148 Cyclone is easy, the ATLAS human powered helicopter was developed by a Canadian team at the University of Toronto.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 811 through 825 (of 5,046 total)

← 1 2 3 … 54 55 56 … 335 336 337 →