Key Publishing

muessigbrod

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

Author

Posts
October 10, 2006 at 8:52 pm in reply to: newbie calling – Gun on Typhoon #1806617

muessigbrod
Participant

I found this quote in my latest AIR INTERNATIONAL issue at the end of an article on state-of-the-art CAS:
“Possibly the most intriguing Aspect of recent CAS experience in Iraq and Afghanistan has been the renaissance of the cannon and unguided rocket. Strafing runs by USAF F-15E Strike Eagles … are all a return to basics and suggest that there can be no substitute for ‘getting down and dirty’ during the close air support battle.”
Hopefully, this time the lessons of war experience will bear fruit on Whitehall decisions and save the RAF from another cost-cutting experience which instead of into costs cuts into operational capabilities.

September 5, 2006 at 11:03 pm in reply to: They're big…and they are North Korean but what are they #1808280

muessigbrod
Participant

As for the second picture, I’d say its nothing sophisticated … seems like a T 54/55 chassis on which they mounted a 122/152 mm cannon … manual loading by unprotected crew … about 30 years behind state-of-the art.

My personal opinion, of course.

August 28, 2006 at 12:15 pm in reply to: Us Air Force obligated to keep aging planes #2579556

muessigbrod
Participant

re-wiring the airframes for bombing missions and adding bomb bay doors would surely be a headache, not to mention strengthening the fuselage or the whole airframe.

Thinking about how cargo doors are cut out in passenger-jet-to freighter-conversions, I don’t believe that adding bomb bay doors to the freight holds would be a major problem. And with more and more stand-off-weapons in operational use it is questionable if we need dedicated bombers to carry them to release point.

Probably the idea of flying around with Dreamliner isn’t sexy enough for the military.

August 28, 2006 at 11:58 am in reply to: newbie calling – Gun on Typhoon #1808927

muessigbrod
Participant

As far as intercepting terror planes, well we will have GR.4s and Gr.9s hanging around for a long time. So they are ground attack fighters, but when you’re intercepting a Cessna or a Boeing 747 does it matter that your not piloting an interceptor???

Bright idea, intercepting a suspect terror plane with a Harrier. But you don’t have Harriers on QRA. Besides, if the suspect plane does not conveniently fly just across your Harrier base, a subsonic plane will probably be too slow to catch up with a passenger jet.

August 15, 2006 at 9:21 pm in reply to: newbie calling – Gun on Typhoon #1809957

muessigbrod
Participant

Not convinced

Its a little more complex…

It was originally removed from all but the first 24 typhoons on cost grounds….
– airframe lasts longer not firing gun (vibration)
– lower cost (guns have to serviced after each live fire mission in peace time)
Andy

Don’t think that Germany, Spain, Italy and Austria are more generous on airframe life than Britain. Besides, If the hardware can’t stand that bit of extra stress, it shouldn’t take off anyway.

Lower cost, sure. But for the sake of operational usefulness? That’s just why I asked for opinions.

August 15, 2006 at 9:10 pm in reply to: newbie calling – Gun on Typhoon #1809958

muessigbrod
Participant

Really?

I think a variety of older jets would be fine for intercepting airliners.

You’re joking. Does any country keep older jets on QRA for the sake of airliner interception?
Author

Posts

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)