dark light

The Village Idi

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 221 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2415726
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Yet overseas aid frequently involves the armed forces, both in responding to disasters and development projects (eg working parties from ships visiting developing nations).

    Crazy!

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2417801
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Did I kill the thread?

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2027973
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    And what if its EMCON silent?

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2028000
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    The two tier usage is my idea also, but my idea is the first tier will use passive sensors primarily that will spot E2 Hawkaye from a very long distance, giving a rough idea where to look closer, then send in 1-2 to switch on the search radar where the Carrier is believed to be located, preferably armed with an AMRAAM to take out a Hawkeye that gets close enough to spot the UAV.
    I think the same platform can be used, but modified with emphasis on sensors vs weapon load depending on mission.

    Okay so the first UAV/aircraft detects the Hawkeye by passive means (ESM), then communicates this to the second which is meant to approach the carrier group and use its search radar with being detected…..?

    in reply to: What's happening with the RN Astute Class Submarine #2028044
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Well at least the galley works.

    Yum Yum

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2028174
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Also see my PM.

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2028182
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    RN harmony rules are upto 660 days away from your homeport in a 36 month period, ie 220 days (about seven months) per year.

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2028433
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    But a really Stealthy UAV will have problems finding the carrier, or any other ship since being stealthy is going to limit radar use.

    Additionally the carrier group can go EMCON silent ….. so it cannot be detected from the group’s own radars.

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2028975
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    The traditional approach is to deal with the lauching platform. I’ve just noticed who those articles were written by, well he doesn’t have an agenda at all, does he?

    The author seems to be unaware that missile armed aircraft and ships can be engaged, and actually that’s one of the reasons for having carriers, to defend other ships, unless you intended to have no maritime presence and surrender control of the sea to whoever.

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2028979
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    That’s your view. The US Navy does not share it.

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2435564
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    If only the force levels and procurements of the SDR in 1998 had been maintained….

    Five RAF air defence sqaudrons
    21 Nimrod MRA4
    40 Infantry battalions
    32 frigates/destroyers
    10 SSNs
    Sea Harrier kept in service until CVF/JCA arrives (very tempting to slip in this link to the PPRuNe Sea Jet thread*)
    CVF in service in 2012 (and 2015)

    Bah…

    * Also mentions frigate/destroyer and submarine cuts.

    in reply to: HMS Invincible #2028981
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Good to hear that the concept of “design for maintainability” was understood by the designers.

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2029300
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Anyone ever seen a picture of an Intruder with Sidewinders? Hang on, I’ve found one:

    http://www.dodmedia.osd.mil/Assets/Still/1993/Marines/DM-ST-93-01320.JPG

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2029458
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    Thanks.

    Back on topic, a recent conversation with an ex USN flyer revealed that both the A6 Intruder and A7 Corsair II could carry Sidewinders. WWII experience led to a desire to get as many aircraft airborne as possible – and try to give them an air to air role.

    See the last page of Ark Royal landings – ARRSE

    During the Cold War, both the A-7 Corsair II and A-6 Intruder could carry and launch AIM-9 Sidewinders. In an attack there was a desire to clear as many aircraft from the deck as possible (think Midway), so there was a general thought to employ those aircraft in an air-to-air role. Couple of problems: A-7/A-6 not equipped with an air-to-air radar, so needed close control for visual pickup. Sidewinder couldn’t work against the incoming missiles. They couldn’t get far enough out in time to work against the Badgers/Bears etc and we all know it much better to kill the archers, not the arrows. They were used for escort duties after a fighter properly intercepted the incoming Soviet aircraft (little problem with F-14A availability) and the Soviet aircraft wanted to wander around the battle group taking pictures to prove they had found the group at sea. More often than not the A-7/A-6 were configured as tankers to try and keep or limited F-14’s airborne.

    With A6 and A7 being replaced by Hornet/Super Hornet (and the EA6B soon being replaced by a version of Super Hornet) all the embarked jets will be capable of air defence of the fleet.

    in reply to: HMS Invincible #2029551
    The Village Idi
    Participant

    I agree that in a crisis all sorts of things can be done much faster than normal (cf my comments (and links) above and elsewhere aboat Sea Harriers stored or at the Culdrose dummy deck*), however, Invincible has been largely cannibalised to keep Illustrious and Ark Royal going.

    Unfortunately this is now common across the fleet, with nagative effects on readiness and the ability of suppliers to produce spares and components in a hurry, and yes, it has cost jobs.

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 221 total)