dark light

Dutchy

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 1,123 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: NH-90 #2513867
    Dutchy
    Participant

    [QUOTE=AndyMcnebb;1081445]

    Norway
    Navy: 6 NFH (ASW),
    Coastcard: 8 NFH
    10 NFH (SAR) (optie)
    QUOTE]

    Yes. This are the right numbers for Norway. But the optinal 10 NFH (SAR) order, are unlikely to happend. Only the Norwegian AirForce field the NH-90
    as our best choice as our new SAR platform. Our rescueworkers and other
    experts whant it removed in the new SAR platform cometition due to its
    lack of range and flytime..

    Thanks, never knew that, keep us update. Interesting though, because the NH-90 will be used as a CSAR platform. I suspect one of the key elements in these kind of missions is range.

    in reply to: TSR2s anywhere? #2514401
    Dutchy
    Participant

    Realy I thought they were all broken up. Just to make sure they were not to fly ever again 😑

    in reply to: NH-90 #2514952
    Dutchy
    Participant

    No.

    The NZ birds were new once and the Aussi one’s where secound hand ex-USN examples. I seem to remember that this was the rude of the problem. Does the Polish navy have the same problem?

    Back to the subject:

    These seems to be the order book at the moment:

    France:
    Marine Nationale: 27 NFH

    Italy
    Army: 60 TTH
    Navy: 46 NFH, 10 TTH
    Airforce: 1TTH/CSAR (optie)

    Germany
    Heer: 54 TTH + 26 TTH (optie)
    Luftwaffe: 30 TTH + 24 TTH (optie)
    Marine: 30 NFH (MH-90)

    The Netherlands
    Royal Navy: 20 NFH

    Portugal
    Army: 10 TTH

    Spain
    Army: 48 TTH
    Airforce: 28 TTH/CSAR
    Navy: 28 NFH/TTH/CSAR

    Sweden
    In total: 13 TTT (SAR), 5 NFH (ASW) + 7 (optie)

    Finland:
    In total 20 TTT (SAR)

    Norway
    Navy: 6 NFH (ASW),
    Coastcard: 8 NFH
    10 NFH (SAR) (optie)

    Greece
    In total: 16 TTH, 4 TTH (speciale operaties) + 14 TTH (optie)

    Oman
    In total: 20 TTH

    Australia
    Army / navy: 46 MRH-90 (TTH)

    New Sealand
    Royal New Zealand Air Force: 8 NH90

    Belgium
    Aircomponent: 10, waarschijnlijk 5 TTH en 5 NFH

    Saudi-Arabia
    In total: 64

    Any more?

    in reply to: Super Etendard in air combat #2524452
    Dutchy
    Participant

    They didn’t fare well against Harriers in the Falklands, but the Entard isn’t a fighter, its air-mud/sea.

    Did they ever fight the Harriers? I always thought that they just sneaked up the British fleet, popped up to fire they excocet missile and went home. They only had five Superettendards with five missiles to begin with. So their role was over pretty soon. They were pretty effective in this way. But please correct me if I’m wrong.

    in reply to: Unreal accidents #2560401
    Dutchy
    Participant

    Any more?

    in reply to: F-15N Sea Eagle #2590778
    Dutchy
    Participant

    And yes, the F18L for USAF is a good choice, too… the great idea is to make a land-based version of the Navy fighters (Tomcats and Hornets) and throw away F-16 and Eagles!!

    Well, the USAF disagreed with you, since the F-18L was basicly the YF-17 which as we all know lost to the YF-16. :diablo:

    Dutchy
    Participant

    A Dutch F-4F (sorry, print only)

    http://web.tiscali.it/aviationgraphic/images/DUTCH_F-4F.jpg

    This aircraft was repainted on the July, 11th 1983 by Dutch technicians at
    Twenthe Air Base into a Dutch F-4 β€œPhantom II”. The aircraft flew two times in
    this livery. During the flights parts of the self adhesive markings went lost.
    On the next evening all markings where removed again and the rudder was
    repainted into its original colour scheme. The code TW313 on the left side and
    TW315 on the right side represented the two Twenthe based Dutch Squadrons. 😎

    Not the best picture, but it is nice to see that the Phantom was yet again in Dutch service. πŸ˜€ http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0773374/L/

    in reply to: What would it be called #544288
    Dutchy
    Participant

    In honour of the comedian Joep van het Heck (sp?)

    Vulgair
    Air Crash

    Youp van ‘t Heck 😎

    in reply to: Airbus lands A319/20 orders from Italy & Mexico #574185
    Dutchy
    Participant

    Looks like Boeing are back in the lead already. Never mind Airbus.

    Airbus 46 – Boeing 68

    see below

    Air India have just orded 68 aircraft.

    23 x 777s,
    8 x 777-200LR (Longer Range) Worldliners and
    15 x 777-300ERs (Extended Range),
    27 x 787-8 Dreamliners.
    18 x Next-Generation 737-800s. for Air India Express, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Air India,

    http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=38235&page=2

    Well: The order, placed with Boeing in December 2005, is valued at more than $11 billion at list prices and deliveries are scheduled to begin in November 2006.

    So placed in december 05, then it still is 46 – 0 for airbus 😎 .

    Good news for Airbus!

    in reply to: CIA-flights #604548
    Dutchy
    Participant

    Already posted this once in another thread, but it’s so good it’s worth posting twice…

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story…1664149,00.html

    link is dead. Do you think the CIA has got anything to do with that :diablo:

    in reply to: General Discussion #330529
    Dutchy
    Participant

    A possibility…………..but what could be the alternative? That perhaps needs more thought.

    Let’s just say that they had made it clear what they intended to do………..for expamle if you were aboard one of the aircraft involved in the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Centre??????????????

    That is the problem, how can you be absolutely sure? How many planes were hijacked for the purpose to make a statement or ransom or whatever versus how many planes where hijacked to purposely crash them? I think the balance would favour the first numerous times.

    So if that is the case and you do attack the terrorist then there would more likely more people killed because of that then in any other way. I don’t think the hijackers (I dislike the word “terrorist”) will make their intentions clear to the passengers.

    It is the same with a bank robbery, the best is to obey the people holding the gun so the authorities can deal with them, whom are trained to do so and more importantly have the means to do so.

    But this is all hypothetical because how many of you can honestly say what they are going to do. I for one can’t.

    in reply to: What Would YOU Do In A Terrorist Attack #1925028
    Dutchy
    Participant

    A possibility…………..but what could be the alternative? That perhaps needs more thought.

    Let’s just say that they had made it clear what they intended to do………..for expamle if you were aboard one of the aircraft involved in the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Centre??????????????

    That is the problem, how can you be absolutely sure? How many planes were hijacked for the purpose to make a statement or ransom or whatever versus how many planes where hijacked to purposely crash them? I think the balance would favour the first numerous times.

    So if that is the case and you do attack the terrorist then there would more likely more people killed because of that then in any other way. I don’t think the hijackers (I dislike the word “terrorist”) will make their intentions clear to the passengers.

    It is the same with a bank robbery, the best is to obey the people holding the gun so the authorities can deal with them, whom are trained to do so and more importantly have the means to do so.

    But this is all hypothetical because how many of you can honestly say what they are going to do. I for one can’t.

    in reply to: USN home video #2609258
    Dutchy
    Participant
    in reply to: What does this do ? #2609768
    Dutchy
    Participant

    Arthur: mate can you explain why all NATO marked planes are registered in Luxemburg?

    Because Luxemburg was / is part of NATO-OTAN and didn’t have an air force of it’s own. Nice to note that they indeed are civilian registered. It might also have something to do with taxes ;-).

    in reply to: U-2 Crashed in southeast asia #2627005
    Dutchy
    Participant

    To add on that, space assets are predictible, hence you could hide something which you don’t want your opponent to see. (Might be a little difficult with a nucliar power station ofsome kind (who said Iran :)))

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 1,123 total)