Dan: Obviously, the air-capable FF/DD was not adoption and probably for good reason. Still, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t conceived with the role I discribed in mind.

Take a close look: that’s a ski-jump up front at the end of a short runway ontop of the hull. So, the Harrier would not operate in VTOL but rather in STOVL mode.

Quite right, I hadn’t noticed that.

The hull in question has 2 Sky Hook installations, suggesting at least 2 Harriers on board, but probably a few more. If you have an escort group of 6-8 ships and 2-3 are of this type then you have 6-12 FRS1 type aircraft.

Sounds reasonable. Anything less than 10-12 aircraft total though will make it very very difficult to maintain a CAP of two aircraft. If you don’t have aircraft on CAP then the air capable ships should probably be on picket duty, interposed along the expected threat axis to allow for time to get the aircaft in the air and still intercept the Bears before they find the convoy. In that case you’ll still need ASW escorts with the merchies

Royal Navy on Sea Harrier FA2 Aircraft endurance: 1hr 30mins (on Combat Air Patrol (CAP) 100nm from Aircraft Carrier)

Sea Harrier FRS1: Max Speed 660 mph (1065 kph / Mach 0.98 ) at sea level, 600 mph (966 kph) at 36000 ft
Tu95RT Bear: Max Level Speed, at altitude: 575 mph (925 km/h) at 40010 ft (12205 m), Mach 0.87
Yep: difficult but not impossible.

[/QUOTE]

Note the Harrier is worse off at high altitude but thats likely where the Bear will be trying to maximise its detection range. Also those are max speeds for the Harrier and that will require full military power. FMP will burn fuel much quicker than cruise or the power settings for loitering on CAP. The Bear can quite likely maintain its max power settings for a lot longer than the Harrier can afford to. Now with an F-35B things might be different 🙂

Still even if the F-35B lives up to expectations I wouldn’t expect these mini-carriers with just a few aircraft to become reality. The main reason being logistics. Everyone of those ships will nedd to have the facilities, equipment and personell to maintain the aircraft and keep them in the fight. On a larger carrier you may have one or two sets of equipment to maintain 12-16 aircraft, having at least a full set to maintain 4 on the smaller vessels significantly increases the costs of getting the same number of aircraft into the fight. Now the operators might be happy enough to call this redundancy but I suspect Treasury is going to look at it and call it unnecessary duplication

Daniel

Distiller….South Africa generates almost 30% of the GDP of the entire African continent.It has the 10th largest stock-exchange worldwide , and is the 20 richest nation worldwide if total GDP is considered.It is not a matter of “using them against their black bretheren”.South Africa is a racially diverse country with bizarrely enough , the Chinese section the fastest growing.It has poverty , it has aids , but it also has some of the most mature financial systems in the world and a very developed heavy industry sector….I think that South Africa , Brazil and China(?) formed a Non-aligned pact a little while back…..anyway , the point of the purchase of these aircraft is in line with the justifiable moaning of the USA that South Africa play a part in African peacekeepng more commesurate with it’s size…and to do this will require aircraft with larger capacity/range characteristics than the C-130 and CASA tpt’s.With the Iraqi occupation requirements and events like Mogadishu , this makes sense from a US political perspective….Just think the C-17 would be a little too large.

This is the same reason the RAAF has a requirement for such an aircraft. At the moment the ADF spends a lot of money chartering Il-76 and An-124 airlifters to support overseas deployments and disaster relief operations. The RAF has also found it leased C-17s as invaluable for the same taskings. As became quite clear after the December 26 Tsunami, its one thing to get people on the ground in a disater area but if you can’t support them then they just become another burden on a devestated infrastructure.

Daniel

i think u got the concepts a little wrong. SM-2/ESSM utlises mid course guidance and requires illumination only in terminal phase hence the illuminators only need to provide illuminator only during final few secs of flight. This allows them to intercept multiple target utlizing time sharing, SPY-1 provides mid course guidance also mid course guidance data can be provided from AEWS/AWACS to the ship can also be used.

Um okay. I know I didn’t use the words mid-course guidance, terminal illumination or time sharing but isn’t that pretty much what I said 🙂 Anyway thanks for cleaning it up and clarifying things.

Daniel

The MR-775 provides target data for 12 targets and Delhi class can engage 4 forward and 2 aft using six Front Dome illuminator radars.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Images/MR-90.jpg

How much does the MR-776 track and how many illuminators does 052B have ?
sinodefence.com confirms by statement and photos there are only four
directors on 052B, same as the much smaller indian Talwar class (though 052B carries 2x the missiles of Talwar).

Type 052Bs directors are of a different type

Kongou also has 4 illuminators methinks just like the Burke.

Only three directors on Burkes (and Kongos) four on Ticos.

The SM-2 missile does not require continuous guidance allowing the directors to guide multiple missiles, belived to be about 4 per director so about 12 at a time. Perhaps more if the SPY-1 can guide.

Daniel

KDX 2 is uncamparably smaller and less sofisticated at only 4000t max with SM1 but no aegis capability, no long range ASM,

KDX-2 has a 32 cell Mk-41 VLS for SM-2MR and VLASROC. As far as AAW capability goes it should be about equivalent to Dehli, Type 52B or Sovremenny but with fewer SAMs. Its also got 8 x Harpoon which is the same as fitted to Kongo and is range comparable to Sunburn and probably to whatever SSM is on 52C. Additionally the KDX-2 apparently has space reserved for LACM.

KDX3 isn’t even layed out yet. Taiwan is to recieve “ONE” Kidd only in “LATE” 2006 and the rest are due in 2008-2010. The Kidd have no VSL, yes to a C3I, good ASW capability but also no long range ASM since they are fitted with Harpoon with 120Km range.
Only the Delhi is in operations status but with out Phased array, VSL and maybe on par in performance with the Sovs considering it has many similar systems.

Type 052C is also unlikely to be considered operational yet. It is however alot further along that road than the KDX-3 to be sure 🙂 The Kidds are certainly no slouch at the AAW game they apart from the US/Japanese AEGIS vessels and the fmr Soviet CGs they have long been the best on the block. The new crop of Euro FFG/DDGs are more sophisticated and the Type 52C should have the edge if its as good as it looks. However the Kidds will still have the advantage of greater magazine space (24 + 44) although they may ship ASROC in addition to SM-2MR. The Kidds are probably also supperior to the Dehli, Sovremenny and Type 52B due to roughly comparable AAW capability plus more missiles.

Daniel

Brute, Flanker thanks I guess some interesting developments are in the wind then.

Daniel

can some correctly id the two different LGBs on this Jag ?

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/events/images/Boban-Jag.jpg

Well I believe it should be Paveway II guidance system on the UK Mk13 100lb bomb.

and here at AeroIndia 2003 with LCA

and on Jag

ACIG – Aero India 2003

and from F-16net forums

The Mirage 2000 were supplied with Thomson-CSF Laser Designator Pod, known as ‘ATLIS’ which was capable of delivery of Matra 1000 kg LGBs, which were purpose built for destruction of reinforced targets. These weapons were highly capable but were very expensive. It was decided to augment their capability by adding the 1000 lb bomb coupled with Paveway II laser-guided bomb kit. The IAF had ordered a number of these, but they had been supplied with an incorrect part. Because of the nuclear test performed by India, they were on the embargo list and were unable to get the correct parts sent as replacements. Consequently IAF technicians had to remanufacture this part in order to make the Paveway serviceable for use on the Mirage.

snip

On June 24th, the Enemy Battalion HQ on Tiger Hill top was hit by two Mirage 2000 employing the ‘PAVEWAY’ Laser Guided Bomb (LGB). This was the first operational use on an LGB by the IAF.

snip

Only 9 LGB’s were dropped during the whole war, 8 by the Mirage fleet and one by a Jaguar.

Jaguar S

Daniel

Hi Dan,

I’m not Blackcat 😉

-(Jai@CDF)

My apologies. 😮 Silly assumption on my part. Is Jai Hind a proper name, a nick or something significantly Indian anyway?

Daniel