Yeah… the Eagle must be superior… WTF would the USAF know about the performance of the Eagle anyway?

I mean who can take the word of the USAF regarding the performance of the Eagle against an Su-30…

…amusing that the biggest Russian Fan Boys on this thread are the USAF!

And harking back to my initial point ie all this is laregly unsubstantiated opinion. Even those things that seem conclusive like a USAF report need to be considered in context. Such as the fact that when you are pushing for more F-22s to be purchased then a study that compares the F-15 unfavourably to the Flanker series may be just what the doctor ordered.

Dan

I read in the article on Thrust Vectoring where the Air Force commissioned a study to see how the SU 30 would do against the F-15. Seems the outcome (and possibly the way the parameters were set) predicted that the SU 30 could be able use its long range missiles to put the f-15 into defense mode and then close enough to use its Infared sensors to find it and attack with an IR missile. This outcome is what the Air Force brass is using to get the F-15 replaced.

Left unsaid is how well the Soviet missiles work and whether the F-15 can use effective ECM on them.

Anyone have an idea how well the SU 30 missiles work?

Pruitt

Well the fact is no one here really knows the answer to that question (if they do they certainly can’t say). However ready yourself for some extremely acrimonious reply’s as you will probably be deluged with some very strong OPINIONS on the subject. I’d suggest a good set of body armour and a helmet and at least a couple of feet of overhead protection in preparation. Dig, dig fast. 😉

Dan

So those engine nacelles, do they originate from a B-1. Looks really good. Is it all scratch built or did you adapt a 1:48 scale Flanker?

Dan

Maybe a bit off-topic, but how difficult would that be (for a country like Australia)? I have no idea how feasible it is.

Pretty bloody unfeasible. Most of our problems seem to have come from insisting on a 100% solution for Australian requirements. Take the Seasprites as an example. Both the Kiwi’s and we chose the SH-2 as the basis for our new helo’s. The Kiwi’s had a simpler requirement from a combat system POV. Ours was supposed to be virtually an all singing all dancing wunderweapon. The Kiwis have had their birds flying and operating reliably now for years doing almost everything we wanted from our birds. And after 10 years and $1.3 billion striving for the 100% solution what do we have? Nothing. Designing and building our own from scratch is the ultimate in 100% solution folly. The reason for buying F-100’s and Super Hornets etc is that we seem to be finally understanding that settling for the much cheaper 95% solution that we can have now is much better financially and operationally than pissing all that time and money chaseing that final 5% that will probably be rarely ever used anyway.

Dan

Be prepared

Cameron Stewart
March 28, 2008

FOR the second time this month, nuclear-armed submarines from China and India have toyed with an Australian navy frigate, keeping it in their gunsights and “sinking” it regularly as it made its way up the NSW coast.

RAAF F/A-18C Hornet during Avalon Airshow in Melbourne. Picture: Stuart Mcevoy
At the same time, Indonesia has sought to embarrass Australia’s undersized and outdated air force by flying its new generation strike bombers along our northern borders in a display of muscular brinkmanship.
Hard to believe? Not according to a frightening new defence report that warns that such fictional scenarios could easily become reality long before 2050.

snip

I thought I would post this because I see alot people from other countries posting on other forums ” but where does this threat come from”. This is why we need to have the edge and I dont think counting on the U.s. in the future is the best idea.

You did read the article right? This is one mans scenario for out to 2050. Crystal ball stuff. Nothing else.

Dan

so what do they call a ship that does AAW,ASW & GP. just a large coastal patrol boat with fancy name

just read yesterday’s courier-mail (25/3/08) say’s that australia should have 400 combat aircraft, cruise missiles, 30 subs etc. don’t know who wrote it.but could be part of new white paper.i don’t have paper here, read it at work. don’t like the paper any way.

Not part of the White Paper, part of a paper by Ross Babbage, at the Kokoda Secuirty Foundation. Haven’t seen the actual paper yet, just reporting on it. The context of those numbers remains to be seen.

Dan

The current government just reconfirmed the SH buy. While the $400million penalty for cancelling sounds a lot its chickenfeed compared to the $6billion for the overall program plus the purported $16billion for the JSF buy. This Government is just going through the motions because of all the noise they made when the buy was first announced. They know full well they won’t be getting the F-22. Why buy Super Hornets if you seriously thought the US would export the F-22. The Raptor is basically available straightaway. In fact given the progress of the US accquisition any export customers have to get them pretty darn quick or they’ll miss out entirely.

Dan

The J is nice and squeaky clean. Yes it can fly higher…but because it is so damn slow, ATC will not let it get up high enough to gain the fuel efficiency advantage. If you notice, many users are now putting the external fuel tanks like the E/H model aircraft have, there is two reasons for this. One, because the aircraft flying at the lower levels are not as fuel efficient as what was once calculated and they are getting hit with range issues. Two, because the Js too are having CWB issues and the extra weight on the wings helps ease some of that stress on the CWB.

Another reason I dislike the J model is the prop. It is going through bad delamination problems and when used in the dirt, they are having to replace a lot of very expensive props and blades…this task is almost impossible in the field unlike the older 54H60 props.
Sometimes less complicated, less sophisticated is better for tactical operations in the dirt. There is a reason why the Active duty AMC units as well as AFSOC are kicking and screaming over the J model…they do not want it.

There are missions where the J model are better suited…but I would turn it down every day of the week doing tactical ops.

The latests unit to give the J model the hit the road sign…
the 109th AW LC-130s out of the NY ANG. They will be adding the eight bladed NP2000 propeller to their older H model aircraft.

As far as the issue of not being cleared by ATC for higher flight levels, are you talking about the CONUS airspace? because I don’t think that is really a universal problem for all operators. Here in Oz for instance the airspace is much less crowded.

Dan