Page 47 – Key Publishing

Aurel

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 691 through 705 (of 939 total)

← 1 2 3 … 46 47 48 … 61 62 63 →

Author

Posts
December 10, 2004 at 8:34 pm in reply to: South Africa to buy 8-14 A400M #2639192

Aurel
Participant

Seems they really love European military hardware. German corvettes, Swedish fighters and now A-400M’s.

December 8, 2004 at 12:05 am in reply to: French forces place an order for the Rafale. #2641166

Aurel
Participant

Rafale M are more expensive and increase the global price. (and carrier trials are awfully expensive )
BTW, the price include a €250 million bill to replace obsolete electronic componants (damned delays )
And there is no doubt that the nuke capability is not the cheapest thing to integrate neither

Therefore I asked for the details. With some better updates compared to tranche 2 Typhoons, it could well be worth the price. For example, the AESA-antenna springs to mind, or the CFT’s.

December 7, 2004 at 2:58 pm in reply to: French forces place an order for the Rafale. #2641384

Aurel
Participant

The German tranche 2 Typhoons are 847457,63 € cheaper per copy. 😮
Not to mention the Gripen for Chicken proposal.
But congratulations to Dassault. It is great to read that the F3 standard is now backed by an order. Is there any information about the F3 capabilities fixed in this contract ?

December 6, 2004 at 6:01 pm in reply to: Greece decides to scrap its Eurofighter deal ! #2641876

Aurel
Participant

Well, an air defense system of one ally covers large parts of the airpace of a second ally. What is ‘unfriendly’ about this ?

December 5, 2004 at 11:48 pm in reply to: Build an Airforce Scenario: Bosnia #2642415

Aurel
Participant

How strict do you define neighbour ? With direct borders only Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro would be on the list. If the whole region is meant, then the task of matching Hungaries Gripen’s should become pretty difficult.
My first idea were Swiss Tigers, but their aren’t enough left to equip the bosnian airforce. So this ex-Saudi Tigers would be a great idea.
Otherwise I would try to get some Viggens, or Israeli Kfir’s.
With that many Strelas floating around in the region, I would forget about any lowflying aircraft and heli’s. Pilot training somewhere else, for VIP Transpors maybe some Dhruvs.

November 30, 2004 at 9:17 pm in reply to: New european surface vessels #2066221

Aurel
Participant

Just a Moment. The Sachsen (Mk41) got 32 cells, Daring (Sylver) got 48 cells.
To which do you refer ?

November 30, 2004 at 8:53 pm in reply to: New european surface vessels #2066234

Aurel
Participant

Some years ago, I visited Manching (EADS facility and WTD 61). There the engineers were very amused about the ARPA-Trial. It was the beginning of the testing at sea. Mounted in the harbour on a solid concrete tower it worked great. But on a ship with it’s rolling and pitching it didn’t anything it was designed for.
Must have been hard work to sort all those problems out.

November 30, 2004 at 8:28 pm in reply to: New european surface vessels #2066237

Aurel
Participant

O.K. Now I begin to understand.
The Horizon’s are Destroyers, only labelled Frigates. Together with the Darings, they got considerably more range then the smaller frigates.
The F-100 is the least capable, but with it’s pure american suite, it was exactly what the Aussies wanted.
Sachsen and De Zeven Provicien are more capable, with a mix of an european fire control and american weapons.
Horizons do have both european suite and weapons.
Daring has the best radarsuite (SAMPSON + improved SMART-L)
Daring and Horizon share the PAAMs weapon’s system.

What I Still don’t understand completely is the differnce in capabilities.
It seems the smaller ships cover with their SM-2 missiles (range ~70/80 Nm) a larger area than the larger ships with the Aster 30 (range ~50 Nm).

In comparison: Daring/Sachsen

Daring: 48 cells Aster 30/15 (Sylver launcher)

Sachsen:32 cells SM2 IIIA or ESSM in Mk41 launchers + 2 RAM Mk 31 launchers (21 rockets)

So got the Asters’s a better ECM resistance or why are they acknowledged as the more modern system ?

November 30, 2004 at 5:46 am in reply to: New european surface vessels #2066277

Aurel
Participant

Well, I’m mostly interested in the Horizon/Daring and De Zeven Provincien/F-100/Sachsen families. All are follow-on’s of the unsuccesful NATO-Frigate something project. DeZP/Sachsen/F-100 are somehow similar, F-100 a bit larger to house the aegis-system. DeZP/F-124 share the same radar. Both larger designs have the Aster missiles and French VLS, while the 3 smaller have American missiles/VLS.
All those ships follow the individual needs of their navies. Where are the main differences, that made it impossible to find a common solution ? Obviously the sizes/ranges differ. The daring seems to be a bit faster. Maybe because carriers are faster (?) than frigates, and therefore a faster destroyer is needed.
Even with the nomenclature I got some problems. All those frigates/destroyers got the tonnage of light cruisers of ww2. And capabilities wise I see no big difference between Daring/Horizon, so why is one considered to be a destroyer, and the others as frigates ?
First, I thought the topspeed would be the difference, but in comparison the destroyers of ww2, all those ships are damn slow. Even the latest Battleships where faster.
Even more confusing, the french/italian Horizon is called a frigate, but mostly listed as a destroyer in national navy comparisons :confused:

November 8, 2004 at 3:22 am in reply to: Raptors at $258 Million each. #2682348

Aurel
Participant

Its really funny to see that many take the Raptor to be out of universe stuff and faiul to understand that if and when the opponents syetsm get that a fly don do abnormal stuffs the game wud be stiff intresting.

For shure it can be done. It will take some time and money to improve the existing radars to do it.
But which third or second world country has the money and the source to buy such equipment ?
In an worst case scenario, you could identify the PLAAF as opponent for the USAF. Their best aircraft are downrated Flankers (at least not the best variant currently under production).
Lets say they can detect the Raptor at a distance of 100km. The Raptor in turn should be able to do this at twice that range. Effect: The Raptor is able the alter it’s course, and will attack from the side or behind, where the Flanker has a detection range from, gues what, 2-10 km ?
The only possibility to avoid such scenarios is to have really many Flankers patrolling the airspace, covering each other.
So it is in the end much more expansive to defend against Raptors then to defend against Eagles. It is more economical to have 275 Raptors than to have x times more legacy fighters like F-15x.

November 6, 2004 at 2:12 pm in reply to: The other "built your airforce thread" #2616709

Aurel
Participant

No, no, Arthur, it is at least ’75, as it took somte time to convert Persia into some kind of UAE, as I wrote.
To give a clear timeframe: You start in ’75 with your build up, and should be ready in ’80.
This covers the L-39ZA(77) and the Backfire B (and if you like it that way Arthur, call it Tu-22M2(76))
You may even resurrect the TSR-2,with a comparable deal to the F-16/60 for the UAE.
It is only for fun purposes, but should be somehow reasonable and within the timeframe.
So my revised proposal:
60 F-14A
90 MiG-23ML later upgraded to MLD model, 30 MiG-23UM
90 Su-22M-3, 30 Su-22UM-3
24 Tu-22M2, 6 Tu-22MP, 6 Tu-22MR
30 L-39C, 30 L-39ZA
42 SK-61
240 S-67 Blackhawk (60 as ASW chopper)
180 SA-316B for training and as UH
24 An-72
18 C-130

November 6, 2004 at 11:49 am in reply to: The other "built your airforce thread" #2616736

Aurel
Participant

Nice to see that the Tomcat seems to be common sense.

I’d keep off the MiG23’s if I were you- even the 27’s. Superb rugged kit but takes time and money to maintain. Buy Lawndarts or rather F/A-18’s instead. Latter were clearly a gen ahead at the time and came with modular arch, LRU’s and BITE.

I would rather rely on MiG-23, if you want MiG-23P. Until the late 80ies no Lawndart was as capable in BVR…
The MiG-27, well you are right, I will change this to Su-22. Same engine (R-29-300), but much more reliable design. This beast is nearly undestructable…:dev2: and has the option to be refitted with the AL-31F, if later on arises the need to replace the -23 with Flankers…
So an own production/maintainance line for Tumansky’s/Lyulkas would be a further puzzle part for an own industry.
(This would be somthing better to start with,compared to MiG-19/21 as China did)
And F-20/F-16 ? No difference if you ask me. Rather save some money and operate the little czech trainer.

@shadow: many offensive systems, tankers, strat bombers, Aardvarks… wanna nuke Israel if popularity sinks, or what ? 😮

November 5, 2004 at 6:52 pm in reply to: Wind tunnel photos #2617248

Aurel
Participant

Looks similar to Germany’s Sanger spaceplane project.

Yep, RWTH means Rheinisch Westfälische Technische Hochschule. Didn’t know it was codeveloped here in Aachen.
Nice pic, I will ask at monday if they got more pics archieved. Damn pretty thing this design.

November 2, 2004 at 10:26 pm in reply to: Up-powered Rafales #2618647

Aurel
Participant

I like the solution of the French Airforce. Instead of more power, they go for longer engine life and better efficiency. This and the proposed CFT’s would give it a pretty long range for such a small aircraft. Don’t know how much the cruising speed decreases, but it can’t be that much. Additionally, i think it increases Rafale’s chances on the fighter market. Lower running costs and better range compared to the Typhoon could help Dassault to sell something else then M2K’s.

November 2, 2004 at 5:18 pm in reply to: Up-powered Rafales #2618818

Aurel
Participant

It was said the uprated M-88 engines would provide 90 kN thrust, as much as the EJ-200. The SFC would remain the same, so the M-88-3 could be considered more efficient.
On the other side is the EJ-200 grown up, too. I got no numbers, but the SPA-doubleseaters got more powerfull engines then the DA’s. With the SPA-singleseaters, even more improved engines become standard, unfortunately I got no exact numbers.
http://www.eurofighter.starstreak.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=972
This may give an impression about the changes done so far.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 691 through 705 (of 939 total)

← 1 2 3 … 46 47 48 … 61 62 63 →