dark light

Sintra

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 601 through 615 (of 3,443 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2186634
    Sintra
    Participant

    Looks like the whole tail section is F 16.

    The F-16 has two F-414 engines and twin tails?

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2190596
    Sintra
    Participant

    F-16 is outperforming any other forum with a score of 144:0. It’s a Champion, unbeaten and uncontested.

    If F-16.net is the worst offender in the net, well, you obviously dont hang a lot in military Forúns, try WAFF for starters.

    Cheers

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2190616
    Sintra
    Participant

    EMAILS will have a smoother acceleration profile… as they are not getting EMAILS

    Yeah, but if the primary DNS server is having a bad day the dam things wont even get off the Carrier, if they actually get airborne they might very well sink the B***y Outlook…

    I´ll get me coat…

    (Hats off to Spud for noticing it)

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2191151
    Sintra
    Participant

    Some details about the programme:

    1. Aircraft serial production expected to start in 2030

    2. Turkish Airforce will buy 250 aircraft to replace F-16s

    3. RAF plan to modernise its Eurofighter fleet with TF-X avionics

    4. New engine to developed based on EJ200 design by RR for TF-X

    http://m.haberturk.com/ekonomi/teknoloji/haber/1373433-7-milyar-dolara-250-ucak-alip-savas-teknolojisi-getirecegiz

    1 – Optimistic
    2 – Unrealistic
    3 – Snowing in Ougadougou?! Aint ASELSAN doing most of the work there? The chances of the RAF (nevermind the other partners) going for avionics for the Phoon not coming from the likes of Selex are not much more than nill (my opinion, disputable off course).
    4 – Realistic

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2191177
    Sintra
    Participant

    And Usaf chief of staff and LoMart CEO would say about the same exact things about the F35…

    I though humanity has moved away from the Ipse dictum argumentations centuries ago…

    Humanity has moved away… well… most of it…

    Cheers

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2191663
    Sintra
    Participant

    but i do not think we do know the exact repartition of EJ 200.

    “FiatAvio is primarily responsible for the low-pressure (LP) shaft and turbine, while ITP manufactures the convergent/divergent nozzle and bypass duct. MTU is responsible for the LP and high-pressure (HP) compressors, and R-R has the combustion system, HP turbine and intermediate casing.”

    Cheers

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2192255
    Sintra
    Participant

    I red about Mattis initiative about a comparison betweenF-35 (what model?) and an “updated” F/A-18 but seeems me just a way to justify themselves with the voters and put pressure to LoMart than a serious thing.

    The “C”. Mattis launched a review comparing the “C” with an updated SH.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2192489
    Sintra
    Participant

    If I were BAE, I would have put my money with one of the Asian projects if possible. Turkey is more susceptible to political unrest that will lead to money and brain drain.

    The Turkish MOD and TAI are payinng for consulting services to BAE, what “money and brain drain” would this last one possibly incur?

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2192761
    Sintra
    Participant

    Industry has definitely performed studies on it, so they are pretty certain that it can be done and know what needs to be changed (cropped fins, at least), but have the mods been funded for actual implementation by the customer? It’s a fair point to ask.

    No. Being discussed right now between MBDA, Lockheed, Britain and Italy, its suposed to go into block 4. The contract for B4 should get signed next year.

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2195457
    Sintra
    Participant

    CFTs alone shouldn’t cost too much… but if anything really costly is to be developped, I can hardly imagine a small customer like that finance it.. the price per unit would skyrocket

    Exactly what happened…

    http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/government-kuwait-fa-18ef-super-hornet-aircraft-support

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2195467
    Sintra
    Participant

    You mean by the 1991 when S U broke up and the whole Soviet AF came to a standstill..? :very_drunk:
    It was the bloddy 90’s that killed of any further production of the F-22!
    What, facing off against vanilla Flankers operating the grainy N001V radar, no ECM capability. Vanilla A-50 with full analoge suite. Everything in Soviet early-warning in the early 90’s was Analoge systems, and they where all operating out of a doctrine which meant being directed by ground based HQ POV.
    This lasted well until 2005 before thing slowly started to happen, SLOWLY!

    The F-22 would have a field day operating in such enviroment.

    Nah, its a much much more contested airspace now that there are several new Voronezh early radar stations, A-50U with is fully digital suite. VKS flankers operating with N011M radars and Irbis. New Mig-31BM with new systems.
    You now got R-77-1 missiles to worry about. you got 4 new S-400 regiments inside Russia. And still much much more to come with PakFa and a new doctrine VKS will no doubt adopt.

    You are making my point.
    The ATF program specifications/KPP´s were laid out before the Berlin Wall, the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union came crashing down. The reason why its production was savagely cut was because the scenario in wich it was suposed to operate had disapeared and the aircraft was a massive overkill for whatever capability any OPFOR could throw at it throught the nineties and the 2000´s.
    The scenario in wich the Raptor was suposed to operate was Central Europe behind the first echelons of the Warsaw Pact in the late nineties, beggining of the 2000´s and that theoretical enviroment was vastly more chalenging than anything Russia can muster today, things like evolved Flankers, Fulcrum´s, Foxhound´s, long range active AAM´s and SAM´s, a new generation of fighters, the MFI would be in active sqn´s, etc, etc, etc, all that in numbers severall orders of magnitude higher than what today´s VVS has and on an operational theather the size of a mail stamp, the number of of sensor/shooter´s by square mile in that scenario (the exact same of the RDA/Poland/Checoslovaquia area in 1985, only with much better hardware) makes today´s Kaliningrad look like a joy ride.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2196157
    Sintra
    Participant

    Su-30SM has to support a much heavier array – and wider – than the one on Su-35S. It also has to support a second pilot, his ejection seat, his equipment, etc. And when you maneuver around at 9G all that weight becomes grossly prohibitive to a lighter front section, hence Su-30SM has a heavier frame and slightly less fuel.

    Can you back up any of that with one single document, quote, book, article, whatever?
    The weight gains of the SU-35 over their predecessors are described in severall articles and its the first time that i´ve saw anyone claiming that the BARS has a “much heavier array”, almost every one and its dogs are convinced that the IRBIS is a direct development of the BARS, actually i´ve seen severall articles stating that the actual antena was retained from its predecessor…
    A few years ago good old Kopp was convinced of it.

    The Irbis-E is a direct evolution of the BARS design, but significantly more powerful. While the hybrid phased array antenna is retained, the noise figure is slightly worse at 3.5 dB, but the receiver has four rather than three discrete channels. The biggest change is in the EGSP-27 transmitter, where the single 7 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok TWT is replaced with a pair of 10 kiloWatt peak power rated Chelnok tubes, ganged to provide a total peak power rating of 20 kiloWatts. The radar is cited at an average power rating of 5 kiloWatts, with 2 kiloWatts CW rating for illumination. NIIP claim twice the bandwidth and improved frequency agility over the BARS, and better ECCM capability. The Irbis-E has new Solo-35.01 digital signal processor hardware and Solo-35.02 data processor, but retains receiver hardware, the master oscillator and exciter of the BARS. A prototype has been in flight test since late 2005.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html#mozTocId773196

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2196173
    Sintra
    Participant

    The Threat picture today just look higher than what was the requirement back at end of the 80/early 90’s. Hense the F-22 can’t do what it was intended to do.

    The threat matrix for the Raptor was not today´s Russia or China, it was the bleeding Fulda Gap in the 90´s/2000´s manned by what it was perceived has a full Soviet tatical aviation army backed by several Eastern European Air Forces. It was a vastly more dangerous place than anything any OPFOR can field today, with MAYBE a single exception, the Taiwan straight´s with China going full “tilt”, and even then…
    If anyone from today´s went back to 1989, headed straight to the ATF program headquarters and told the chaps there that “in 2017 the worst opfor that anyone can field is improved versions of the Flanker/Foxhound coupled with the S-300PMU-3 AKA “S-400” would have been met with disbelief

    in reply to: USAF T-X #2196318
    Sintra
    Participant

    Trainers are a boon for aviation industrial complex. Why not just use old jets ? F-16’s are almost that toy size anyway.

    Because a) the Vipers are being flogged to death in combat sqn´s, b) there are not 350 of the twin seaters in good conditions outside of combat sqn´s, c) because they are expensive to maintain and fly.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2196816
    Sintra
    Participant

    No. First in is a NATO label meaning “alone”. 3 nations : UK, France and USA.

    Australia and Japan certainly fit the bill. And in a pinch the likes of the Italians, the Spanish and the Germans could very well pick a fight on their own. Oh, and Turkey. South Korea?

Viewing 15 posts - 601 through 615 (of 3,443 total)