dark light

Sintra

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,906 through 1,920 (of 3,443 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288428
    Sintra
    Participant

    How will harpy Get you past S-300 launchers guarded my TOrM-1?
    S-300 missiles can range from 93 miles to 150 Nms depending on the variant.
    At this point the heavy loaded griffin must drop its weapons load to maneuver.
    Here is an important history lesson from the gulf war. This is why conventional aircraft are not in vogue.

    The Package Q Airstrike was the largest air strike of the Gulf War,[4] and the largest strike of F-16s in military history. Many aircraft including the F-117 were used to attack targets in Baghdad, which was the most heavily defended area of Iraq. The same target was hit several times by F-117, and the last package consisted of 17 F-111F on the 19th day of the war.[5]

    The main target of the strike was the Osirak Nuclear Reactor in Baghdad, along with many other military sites across the city. Two aircraft were shot down, with two pilots becoming POWs. The majority of the mission goals were met, with the reactor itself severely damaged and most of the secondary targets hit as well.[4]

    The attack was the largest of the war and represented an attempt to strike Iraqi defenses a serious blow. The raid illustrated how a number of small incidents or stresses, none by themselves necessarily serious, could contribute to an unsatisfactory outcome,[4] which eventually convinced USAF commanders to call off further airstrikes against downtown Baghdad

    More

    On the afternoon of 19 January, all the aircraft took off from Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. From there, they all met with tankers in Saudi Arabia, near the border of Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Link-up and refueling with the tankers ran into problems. There was bad weather along the tanker tracks, and the tankers approached the release point too early. Consequently, they throttled back to minimum speed, which in turn seriously affected the accompanying fighters. The F-16s were soon close to stalling out, and some had to light afterburners just to stay airborne; four fighters coming off the last tanker fell so far behind that their mission commander ordered them to return to base.

    After the refueling, all the aircraft turned towards Baghdad, and headed out in force. They had to dodge AAA and SAMs sporadically along the trip, though as the package reached Baghdad airspace, it broke out into the open. Iraqi gunners greeted the Americans with a couple of high-altitude shots in the middle of several formations. Not surprisingly, there were difficulties in communicating among mission groups in the package; the mission commander of the flight attacking downtown Baghdad estimated that he received approximately 80 percent of the calls.

    Adding to the disarray of the flak exploding below, the Iraqis threw 100-mm shells into the formations. From the moment the package approached Baghdad’s air defenses, the Weasels engaged enemy SAM sites. However, there was a problem with the Weasels allocated to the mission; either because of fuel, timing, or the decision of the package commander, not all made it to Baghdad; moreover, some Weasels did not fire all their HARMs, which suggests that they had to leave because of fuel problems.

    Approaching their targets, the “downtown” aircraft (flying F-16s with newer model engines) passed F-16s on the way to, rolling in on, and leaving targets all in a hostile environment. On their way to downtown, the F-4 “Wild Weasels” left, being low on fuel. This left the F-16s and F-15Cs alone against the air defenses. As Maj. John Nichols rolled in to strike his target, the Iraqi Air Force Headquarters, he heard the Weasels call that they were leaving. Unfortunately, cloud cover obscured the target; Nichols rolled off to turn to an alternate target, an oil refinery which was under attack by a portion of his formation.

    Up to this point, the Iraqis had fired most of their SAMs ballistically. Within a short time of the Weasel call that they were leaving, SAMs directly engaged Nichols’ flight. Many SAMs were now guided and most of his flight had to take evasive action, which included “last-ditch maneuvers” such as jettisoning fuel tanks and bombs. Approximately half of the flight struck the oil refinery; others were en route to alternate targets when SAMs engaged and forced them to jettison ordnance.[3]

    SAMs hit one F-16 just as the last bombs were striking the oil refinery. As the flight egressed Baghdad, evading SAMs, another missile impacted near another F-16. Both aircraft were lost, but their pilots survived the war as POWs. One of the two lost aircraft managed to fly for 150 miles on the return route after taking a SA-3 missile just south of Baghdad, before the engine quit.[3] In all, the participants in the wild ride over the capital counted twenty SAMs in the air; one pilot dodged no fewer than six. Many of the F-16 aircraft sustained major or minor damage, but stayed airworthy.

    These are the reasons for the commonality of airframe across nato. here we learned.

    1. having dissimilar aircraft performing various mission brings another level of difficultly to a war plan.
    2. Planes that hang heavy things from there wings and lack internal bays not only suffer from more than the initial weight and performance penalty.
    An adversary only has to make the aircraft evasive maneuver to totally defeat the mission. when your getting shot at your going to dump fuel and weapons.
    3. 5th generation airframes keep most of there flight envelope in stealth mode
    4. Its better to be Not see and not tracked rather than waste gas turning all day.

    Oh my goodness, Q Package all over again…

    Thank the gods that the LM rep´s are way above this (low) level of understanding because if the best that the chaps that suport Dave acquisition could came up is “Q Package”, the entire JSF program would have been terminated a decade ago!

    Q Package was a badly planed and coordinated mission. Its entirely stupid to go after a bloody gigantic fixed target in the downtown enemy capital with MK82 dumb bombs, thats what Q Package tried to do. Q Package repeated the errors that the US Navy had done over Lebanon a decade before.
    Interestingly enough the example that you use to suport your point of view (“You need to fly over the thing and put a bomb through it”) is the exact one (a big static target in a highly defended area) that today is considered a classic case for “CASOMING”.
    The RAF learned that at its own expenses, their answer was not “we must get an all Stealth FJ TAC fleet”, it was (roughly counting) nine hundred Storm Shadows who have been doing an admirable job since they were acquired.

    ask your self how the NG griffin would fare in the same scenario. at the end of the day some things can never be killed with cruise missiles alone. You need to fly over the thing and put a bomb through it.

    Bloody well, it would have been droping a dozen LFK Taurus five hundred km´s away from Bagdad.

    in reply to: F-35 News thread. Part Deux #2288440
    Sintra
    Participant

    …Inspired to go OT in the last sentences… for those enjoying dry wines with that has lots of tannins i can strongly recommend Primitivo wines from Puglia (they are cheap and taste magnificent). But for now I wil do with brandy. Thx for starting my cravings for booze Sintra.

    Thanks for the sugestion, never tasted them, but its noted.

    in reply to: F-35 News thread. Part Deux #2288443
    Sintra
    Participant

    As far as a basis: If the APA says that the Su-27/30/35 will clean the skies of F-35s, what hope would they give a 4th gen asset have when the F-35 has better datalinks, better radar, and a much better RCS? Remember that the F-35 can use the Meteor too, so no benefit to the 4th gen asset there.

    Can i throw the AN/APG-82 to the mixture? Or can we wait for the final configuration of CAPTOR-E?

    On the issue of missiles, the -120D has a better datalink, INS, & likely better ECCM while the Meteor likely has better range.

    Utter tosh, you dont have one single reliable comparison source in the open public about the MBDA Meteor (or by the way on the “Delta”)…

    in reply to: F-35 News thread. Part Deux #2288717
    Sintra
    Participant

    Well lets not forget that APA advocated the UK pay for a navalised F-22! Something the USN wasn’t even prepared to do! They also pushed the standard F-22 for the Marine Corps. Or the time they suggested the UK should scrap its Typhoon purchase now and switch to the F-16.

    Basically aside from the F-16 flight of fantasy all APA solutions revolve around the F-22.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-240209-1.html

    Slight correction, APA advocated an all Viper force for the RAF, first, then severall months later, they sudenly were advocating that Typhons were not enough to deal with Flankers and recomend the “common” type Raptor!
    The “Canard” version of the Raptor was intended for the US Navy, and the idea of having the F-22 with the USMC markings is “IMVIO” (in my very ignorant opinion) entirely out of this planet.

    Mind you, a balanced mix of Vipers and Raptors would (probably) fill the ticket very well for the USAF and i would be very, very cautious in branding chaps like Koop or Goon with the epithets that some have called them, those two have the CV´s in the right fields to be taken seriously, even if we dont agree with them.

    ps- Entirely out of topic alert, bored with Chardonnay and/or Sauvignon, try “Verdelho”, just tasting a bl***y fantastic one right now! If i am not mistaken the Aussies do make a few decent ones has well… I know, out of topic…

    in reply to: F-35 vs mig-31BM , new F-18E/F and F-15SE #2288792
    Sintra
    Participant

    98-07 has PIRATE, too

    http://www.abload.de/img/highres_ipa7trialsr04v.jpg

    full story:
    http://www.eurofighter.com/news/IPA7PavewayIVTrials.asp

    IPA7, the other German IPA.
    Interestingly, when this photo was taken the IPA7 had just made a more than two hours flight on internal fuel only, and with THAT load.

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288804
    Sintra
    Participant

    F-22 did not have to cover the entire distance, (it wasn’t a scenario of P-51s shadowing B-17s to Berlin). F-22 only had to create an initial opening in the IADS for the strikers, who would ingress to the target on their own.

    Ok.

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288807
    Sintra
    Participant

    Then either way they are stuffed, because the Griffin couldn’t penetrate it self out of a paper bag.

    If you dont have arguments, throw a silly line.

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288861
    Sintra
    Participant

    No Make that 2X 2000Lb weapons+ 2 AMRAAMs in stealth mode going 600+NM

    Never mind that the F-35A doesnt do that, i´ve thought that by now you´ve already understood that the F-35A had slightly failed the range KPP, and i am at a loss why you are still bringing this one up.

    or 8X SDB. How many heavy weapons does the NG griffin carry along with fuel tanks?

    http://www.aereo.jor.br/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/gripen-ng-2.jpg

    Again your spinning the numbers

    Am i?! Could you point one single moment that i´ve “spinned” numbers? Because i am really trying to be objective.

    Do you or do you not claim that the Griffin can super cruise?
    If you do then My argument stands. You believe that the European definition of super-cruise is mach 1+ with no AB. Certainly your not going to claim that the Griffin can super-cruise along with the F-22. Your not claiming that the Griffin can cruise at mach 1.7 are you?
    If you don’t claim that the griffin can super cruise than I stand corrected, and we have a fighter in the F-35 F-16 class only, with less payload and range.

    I´ve never, ever mentioned the word “Supercruise” before you´ve (wrongly) went a “go” at me!
    The Gripen NG equiped with a pair of Iris-T can indeed maintain a “handsome” (words of Vishnu Som, not mine) supersonic speed without afterburner, the F-35A cant. His that operationaly relevant? Doubtfull.
    If you want to call it “supercruise”, thats up to you.

    But at what profile? the F-35 has nearly this range with a clean profile, can the Griffin keep this profile and still pull 9Gs? What happens when they figure out how to put wing tanks or CFTs on a F-35? since we are talking about hypothetical aircraft, when will this NG griffin reach IOC? How will the griffin fair in a anti- access environment? Could it fly CAPs over the Iranian coast or near the Straits of Formosa? What can a griffin do that a F-16 cannot?
    These are the real questions that should be answered before you say “Griffin is much better Buy Griffin”

    Jaidyn24

    When did i said “Griffin is much better Buy Griffin”?
    Its a bit hard to discuss when you constantly put words on my mouth or distort what i write…
    It seems that you are confusing me with a multitude of people.
    In this topic i´ve specificaly stated that if Denmark has enough budget to buy enough airframes to stand up the number of sqn´s that covers the Flyvevåbnet requirements, plus the budget to operate them on the typical 180h/year by pilot, them go for it, i´ve also specificaly stated that the Gripen NG is a serious option if the budget is not there and the option is to halve the fleet and do some serious cuts in flight hours…
    And yes, another serious option would be the LM F-16V, but LM is not proposing it.

    Read carefuly this topic again, several of your questions i´ve already answered.

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288929
    Sintra
    Participant

    Remember that the A-10 and F-16 were designed when the opponent was Soviet tank armies advancing through West Germany. The life expectancy of an A-10 and F-16 was less than 5 sorties. The purpose of A-10 and F-16 was to channelize the Soviet advance so tactical nukes could be used on bottlenecked Soviet forces. Uber-sophisticated jets were not needed for that role.
    F-15 and F-111 were only expected to survive 8-10 sorties.

    Thats a fine point, i admit.

    F-22 was intended to clear the way for strikers to bomb Soviet Army command centers in Poland, Belarus and Ukraine.

    Now, you´ve touched an interesting question (not Dave related).
    What happened to the ATF range?
    A Raptor wont go from Bonn to the center of “Belarus and Ukraine” and get back, did the range requirements for the ATF program relaxed somewhere along the way or did i mix things and they were not there in the first place?

    Cheers

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288943
    Sintra
    Participant

    1. OK so your comparing a fully combat loaded F-35 to a ferry range Griffin?

    No, i am comparing a very, very, very lightly armed F-35A (two 500 lbs GBU-12, two AIM-120) and all the external fuel it can carry in a HI-HI-HI profile, with a combat loaded (non disclosed weapons) Gripen NG in a interdiction ATG mission…

    http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/12/13/7cd7ee38-f714-4c48-bdae-a6c2be6f81e2.Full.jpg

    Do try to read the documents that are presented to you by the other chaps, will you?

    You claimed a marginal SC at 1.2 which isn’t up to U.S.

    I didnt claimed nothing of the sort…

    How is it that by your definition mach 1 with no AB is super-cruise when its griffin, but mach 1 with no AB on a F-16/F-35 (note they handle similar because of the flight software) is not super cruise?

    My definition? Wrong again…
    And by the way, to cross the sound barrier a Raptor (or in the old times a Concorde) will indeed light the burner, then after getting at the bingo speed the pilot throtles back, it actually saves fuel to light the burner for a short time.

    5. even with out the 6 AMRAAM rack and dropping the 10 miles of fuel margin in the KPP the F-35 is a lot better than EVERY version and every variant of griffin. Please show me a version of griffin that goes 600+ NM with 2klbs and 2 AMRAAMs and I will be silent.

    I´ve already did, but 700NM plus 30 minutes on station with 4 AIM120+2 IRIS T is enough for you?

    http://pt.scribd.com/doc/92382019/Gripen-Briefing-Farnborough-2010

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288985
    Sintra
    Participant

    I personally believe the AMX is the equivalent of a modernized A-4. Light, affordable, durable, sophisticated enough, serviceable, and maintainable. The same qualities that made the Skyhawk so popular. Sometimes I think politicians have let our services dictate their own spending to the point they are crushed by their own success. Instead of always aiming for unobtainium they should be going for good enough to get the job done.

    Hey, hey, hear the man.

    The last time that the USAF went for a “non unobtainium” tac jet fleet was with the Viper and the warthog, miserable failures… OH, wait!

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288994
    Sintra
    Participant

    Did well in Afghanistan, too.

    I really, really like the idea of an updated AMX. Non-AB EJ200 (no ITAR) or F414, Vixen 500E, & the sort of cockpit upgrade that’s being applied to some current AMXs. Perfectly adequate for all the low intensity wars NATO countries have actually been fighting for the last 20 years, & for doing the drudgery once air defence systems have been broken.

    Yes, the small bird has done a sterling job in A´stan, and in Libia.

    The Italians have continuosly upgraded the aircraft, by 1999 they had an interesting selection of PGM´s, notably the IAI Opher was a succes, today they work (very well) in tandem with the AMI RQ-1´s.

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2289006
    Sintra
    Participant

    1. The F-35 has a 600 NM combat radius on INTERNAL fuel.
    The griffen has a 431 NM radius

    The F-35A failed (by a very, very small, small number, six miles) the KPP for combat radius on internal fuel, the KPP was 590 NM, the aircraft flies for 584 NM.
    http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/F-35-SAR.pdf

    The combat radius for a F-35A equiped with the maximum internal and external fuel is (was? Numbers from the LM presentation to the Norwegian Government in 2008, seeing how they were hopelesly optimistic for the range on internal fuel…) 728 NM.

    http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/4/8b64135d-310d-4106-8400-6f51f8d22a4d.Full.jpg

    http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FD/Temadokumenter/JSF_RBI-svar.pdf

    The equivalent number for the Gripen NG is right here (page 13):
    http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20presentation%20Farnborough.pdf

    The comparison with the much heavier Dave is not a pretty one (for the Dave).

    The rest of your numbers are identicaly bogus, you´ve mixed the Gripen A/B/C/D with the E/F, very diferent birds.

    Do you know very much about the F-35?

    He actualy knows a lot more on the JSF than you do on the Gripen.

    in reply to: F-35 vs mig-31BM , new F-18E/F and F-15SE #2289245
    Sintra
    Participant

    What is up with the 98 – 03? Is that a testbed or the latest trance?

    98-03 is Eurofighter IPA3, a test airframe equiped with Pirate (it was one of the aircrafts that were used in the Swiss and Indian airforces evaluations).

    “The instrumented production aircraft (IPA) are seven production standard aircraft fitted with telemetry instruments for dedicated flight testing and further systems development.”

    The Luftwaffe didnt acquire Pirate for its fleet (cost cuts).

    Cheers

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2289325
    Sintra
    Participant

    So, we have come full circle back to post #14.

    Does Denmark only expect their combat airplanes to do easy things such as airshow displays and fly-bys for Royal Holidays (or Libya)? Or do they expect to be part of a deployed coalition which can defeat a sophisticated, capable adversary?

    Or in alternative they might get an halved fleet of hangar queens locked on land because they cant pay enough flight hours.
    Choices, choices…

    ps- Kosovo, 1999. The combat record of the AMX International should be made a case study in more than one place.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,906 through 1,920 (of 3,443 total)