dark light

savage-rabbit

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 306 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Are there any good detail shots of the J-7II? #2631232
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Thanks very much for the pics !!! 😀
    Do you have cockpit pictures of the Mig-21F-13, too?

    If you are thinking of building a scale model kit your best bet for a J-7II cockpit is to use a MiG21F-13 cockpit detailing kit. It’s not a perfect match by any means but better than nothing. I have seen some cockpit shots of the MiG-21F-13, there is a good one in the Aerofax book but it is sans the lead computing reflector gunsight. I’d actually like to get my paws on a good cockpit shot myself that shows the F-13’s gunsight.

    in reply to: Are there any good detail shots of the J-7II? #2631987
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Hi,
    I am searching for pictures of the landing gear, the wheel wells, the exhaust and and the cockpit of the J-7II. Do you have such photos or is it all secret?

    The cockpit photo above is of a J-7EB. I have never seen a genuine J-7II cockpit photo.

    in reply to: Any knews about HAFs future plans? #2638432
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Originally HAF was planning to cover 1% of Typhoon development costs and to acquire 60 Tranche 2 aircraft. Later the Rafale should have been favorized.. No idea, what is next..

    Didn’t they just bail out of that deal? Or have they filp flopped on it again?

    in reply to: AMX vs Harrier for usefulness in a carrier #2638532
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    The Navy has stated repeatedly that it wants nothing to do with VTOL jets so this line of thought is pretty much pointless….

    With an accident rate for the Harrier that is 4 times higher than that of the F-18 even today I can see why. The Harrier is a b!tch to fly. Operating the Harrier would provide some uniqe capabilities but it would require really good pilots and complete commitment by the government to never submitting the Navy training establishment to financial cutbacks since cheaping out on training would result in a splraling accident rate. (Not that I doubt the skill of Brazilian naval pilots, I’d worry more about the latter problem 🙂 ) On the other hand the Harrier is a phase-out model that will be going out of service with the US/UK soon so used, zero timed or low time, AV-8 jets can in the future probably be had fairly cheaply as the US begins to stock up on the F-35. I’d certainly prefer the AV-8 to the British models.

    in reply to: Pakistan F-6 #2646413
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Hello,
    I would like to know if F-6 fighters were dilivered to Pakistan with Martin Baker seats already installed? If not, When were they installed?
    Thanks

    I don´t think so. From what I have been told the Pakistanis modded the F-6 extensively and did so them selves. That includes upgrading electronics, installing extra pylons for Sidewinder missiles, enabling the F-6 to carry western air to ground munitions and installing the MB seats. The Pakistanis even designed their own conformal belly tank for the F-6. By the early 1980s things had changed in China and the Chinese were making efforts to make their export fighters more competetive by installing western equipment. It has been claimed that the F-7M for example was delivered from Chengdu with the Martin-Baker seat already installed if the customer requested it rather than the Chinese made HTY series seat standard on the F-7M. I can’t confirm that though. It could just as easily be that the Chinese simply made provision for the MB seat on the F-7M and it was installed in the airframe after delivery by people from Martin-Baker, Chengdu and the customers own techincians during final assembly.

    in reply to: A-10'S AND APACHES FOR AFGAN ARMY?? #2650971
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    A lot depends on improving the capabilities of the Afghan army.

    I’d go further, the survival of any future Afghan government will depend upon the capability of the Afghan army for decades to come. That country has been way to badly mucked up by the US and USSR proxy war and later the Taliban. I’d say the Afghans are being pretty realistic about what a future central government will need to get (read as: force) the warlords to smile and obey. Those guys will only respect a government that has the hardware and the army with which to wipe them out if they annoy it to much.

    in reply to: China's News, Pics and Speculation Part 6 #2651940
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    What would this be?

    The topmost picture is of a J-7G the third one shows a 4th division J-7E.

    in reply to: Small Airforces pics part 3 #2651948
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    SAAF Hawk Mk120

    Damn….. now that’s desktop wallpaper material. Where did that come from and is there more?

    in reply to: China's News, Pics and Speculation Part 6 #2652681
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    What is this?

    A pressure test chamber?

    in reply to: Your Pick for the Best Point Defence Fighter! #2652684
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    MiG-21 Bison with J-7E style wings would be nice.

    Shouldn’t that be a J-7D with J-7E style double delta wings packing the PL-9, SD-10 and a scaled down version of the J-10’s radar? Even then, being a new build airframe fitted with a reasonably good BVR missile, it would still be lower on my list than any of the original alternatives. The design is to old. On the other hand a single seat version of the FTC-2000 might have some potential.

    P.S. Hamburger, I’d still like to know if and why the Mako program is dead. Or was that statement just something that came out of the south end of a north bound Norwegian bull? 😀

    in reply to: Your Pick for the Best Point Defence Fighter! #2654326
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    EADS Mako – good as dead

    Care to explain that? Last I knew they were still in the design phase.

    in reply to: New kinkiness from the Austrian EF2000 #2655490
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Das Verteidigungsministerium betonte am Freitag in einer Aussendung, es sei nicht daran gedacht, auf Komponenten des Vertrages zu verzichten: “Die elektronische Ausrüstung wird also wie im Vertrag vereinbart bei den österreichischen Eurofightern dabei sein.” Freund-Feind-Identifikationssoftware für die Flugzeuge sei “selbstverständlich” vorgesehen.

    Source: http://www.networld.at/index.html?/articles/0506/30/104953.shtml

    Translation:

    The ministry of defense emphasised this friday in an announcement that it does not intend to dispense with parts of the contract. “The electonich outfitting of the Austrian Eurofighters will be implemented as stipulated in the contract. It goes with out saying that the IFF software will be installed.”

    The most that article talks about is skipping PARTS of the IFF software, NOT all of it.

    That last article:

    http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=1949272

    At the top of this article there is what looks like an attendum:

    Aufregung um den STANDARD-Bericht vom Freitag über Pläne des Heeres, auf für den Auslandseinsatz wichtige Teile der Luftstreitkräfte zu verzichten: Der Eurofighter werde nun doch voll ausgerüstet, versichert das Ministerium.

    Translation:

    Excitement about the report by the STANDARD from last Friday about plans by the Army to dispense with equipment vital to the air force if for participating in out of country deployments: The Ministry [of defense] now assures, the Eurofighter is now after all to be fully equipped.

    It seems to me that some overenthusiastic Austrian bureaucrat decided to play aruound with the magic cost cutting sword and that whatever came out of that exercise has been filed away in the waste paper basket as far as the Typhoon is concerned.

    P.S. Can somebody please point me to an source that claims BVR was to be scrapped for the Austrian Typhoons? I´d like to read the article just to get a good laugh. 😀

    in reply to: New kinkiness from the Austrian EF2000 #2656242
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Looks like Austria seeks ways to reduce the costs of their Eurofighters.
    Rumor has it, that they want to leave out the IFF, the RWR and the provisions to launch anything more than a AIM-9. Oh how that does not suprise me!

    Story link pleas, English or German, I don’t care which language.

    in reply to: Cost for the Typhoon #2660467
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Not many countries will buy the Typhoon, when it is helpless against a F-22.

    Those two are extremely unlikely to ever meet in battle. I’m wondering who will be able to afford them? There can’t be more than ten potential export customers for the F-22 and half of them is already commited to the Typhoon while France chose the Rafale. The F-22 is not exactly the affordable, sold by the batch like bananas, MiG-21 of our times. 😀 The Typhoon and the Rafale are only somewhat more affordable but still out of the pricerange of all but what??? two or at the most three doozen air forces on this planet? The rest of the (150 plus??) air forces on this planet will be taking a look at second hand F-16s, Mirages, Chinese F-10s or MiG-29’s or something even cheaper.

    in reply to: Cost for the Typhoon #2660725
    savage-rabbit
    Participant

    Savage rabbit,
    you can’t calculate that way. It is never a one vs one situation as used in some tests. (or 2 vs 2) or whatever was used.
    If you get for one Raptor two/three Typhoon and four/five/six Flankers things change a bit.
    Additionally there are not only top priorty threats, for shooting down export MiG’s you don’t need an aircraft capable of downing SuperFlankers.
    It all depends on the future acquisitions of potential enemies. The new benchmark could become PAK-FA, but who knows when and in which numbers.
    Ballistic missiles are a much more immanent thread.
    And here lack both weapons to intercept them.

    They used multiple human pilots in networked simulators that’s hardly one on one especially if you throw in AI opponents. And I never claimed this sim was perfect, it isnt. That being said I’d prefer to wait for more accurate large scale simulations using acutal ELINT data on the F-22 and experience gained in exercises before making final conclusions on the exchange ratio of the Typhoon and F-22 vs some benchmark opponent. But I stand by what I said, in the end it boils down to kills vs. cost. That’s how the math was done during WWII and it still is. Projects get dropped all the time when a small increase in capability turns out to be disproportionately costly.

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 306 total)