sealordlawrenceTo be honest, gun artillery is not accurate enough to do what the mission requires as far as British are concerned, unless a GPS guided shell has been developed or a Copperhead type weapon is used (which would have to direct line of sight designation, which would best be done from the air anyway). The whole point of the CAS in support of the British forces is to kill the Talbain without wiping out whole villages, which is what would happen with any form of artillery barrage. PMG’s from aircraft are the best weapon to do it, plus any mobile gun’s are just another big logistics problem that has to be supported in the field.
Modern artillery is not that far of air delivered PGM’s in terms of acuracy if not equal depending on the system being used. Artillery ‘barrages’ are now very unusual. Wiping out a whole village is not something that would occur with artillery today unless you wanted it to.
sealordlawrenceThat would be a bifurcated inlet duct, funny ’cause I wouldn’t be able to see (a no-doubt treated crystal fan-blade) compressor face through it, in line-of-sight. You might, being a lord of the sea, but I doubt it- as I fear your knowledge of stealth is as great as your grasp of latin.
Latin has nothing to do with this so stop going off topic to score petty points.:mad:
The point is that it looks large and very unsubtle, it may well be stealthy but it does not look F-35 intake stealthy and certainly not X-47 stealthy.
sealordlawrenceCould the Tornado be fitted with something like SDB or BANG in multiple numbers under the fuselage? Say eight SDB’s would provide a good precision attack capability whilst still providing a reasonable endurance for CAP (A2G taxi rank style). It seems like a good idea to me, the french are using the Rafale as a bomb truck in the ghan with multiple small bombs so I cant see why the British cant do it with the Tornado, it would probably be a better platform than the Rafale for this at the moment anyway, it is afterall a dedicated striker?:confused:
sealordlawrenceROFL!. All they’ve actually shown is that they can build a model of fanboy art. They haven’t DEMONSTRATED any ability at building an operational stealth aircraft at all. They build a mockup that looks like all the other mockups out there and all of a sudden they’re gifted with the ability to build to the level of the B-2 or X-45? Laughable.
That pretty much covers it. Stealth is a very subtle art and you can not simply look at something and say ‘yeah that thing is as stealthy as XYZ’. Even if you could that huge gaping intake does not look that stealthy to start with.
sealordlawrenceI never said the ‘Skat’ was anything other than a mock-up. I just observed that their first stealth aircraft is B2/X-45 level, which the likes of Barrie, Sweetman et al concur.
But if MiG have announced to the World a first flight within 2yrs and they’ve been working on it for some time already- then it’s a serious programme.
No, the basic shape is the same. There is alot more to stealth than just a basic shape.:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceIt would seem that the Rafale M wasn’t the limiting factor in the size of the CdeG. I have no doubt that the Rafale could operate from a somewhat smaller CATOBAR carrier than the CdeG, but I doubt that the E-2C could.
It is fair to say that 25,000 to 35,000 ton carrier might be able to accomodate one, or two, 75 meter catapults, and perhaps even a full squadron, or two, of Rafale M fighters.
Even the Foch could launch the Rafale M, although at a reduced weight of 16,500kg MTOW compared to the current maxium of 22,200 MTOW, so it is wrong to think that even a 50 meter catapult couldn’t launch a modern fighter, within certain severe limitations.
The CdG had to have a flight deck enlarged to enable her to operate the E2C safely. It is not just coincidence that the CVF’s have crept up in size so quickly.
sealordlawrenceI couldnt give a damn about the Hornet or whichever aircraft anyone is shilling. The simple fact is that if anyone else thinks that all aircraft have incident free development, then I have a bridge to sell them as well as would like to request them to stop trolling in the thread.
The IAF has repeatedly stated it will order 220 aircraft, the GOI has stated the same, if some are blind enough to ignore that and fixate upon stupid claims of mine is bigger than yours and keep shilling their aircraft of choice- its a bloody distraction. So STOP.
Calm down, I wasnt promoting any other aircraft, simply pointing out that the SH is in service and the LCA is not.
sealordlawrenceYeah but knowing politicians if their children served in the army the air force and navy would cease to exist so you’d have to spread them amongst all the services to counteract the corruption and self-interest.
Not too mention that they would all be given nice quiet desk jobs state side.;)
sealordlawrenceMaybe the trend towards smaller calibers is being reversed?!?!?!?
Indeed, the US has developed the 6.8 SPC but it looks like it will never replace the 5.56 in widespread service.
Peronally I would take an AR-15 custom built with the LWRC gas piston system with the stock grip and vertical foregrip of my choice with an S&B short-dot scope chambered in 6.8 SPC.
sealordlawrenceThe AK-47 is very rugged and very reliable, its 7.62mm round is very effective against troops without body armor. However its accuracy is awful. Compared to the SA80A1 any weapon is better. Compared to the A2, I would lean towards the british weapon. The SLR is really in a different class and not a practical weapon as a true assault rifle. The M-16 is accurate and reasonably reliable when properly maintained (my own opinion is that a gas piston is the solution). The NATO 5.56 is contrerversial round but it gets the job done. If you can shoot accurately I would take a ‘western’ weapon over an AK any day.
sealordlawrenceAs I said earlier: In theory, yes. In practice, not likely.
Why would they be called upon to penetrate defended airspace when they have the luxury of firing their PGMs (cruise missiles) from thousands of kilometers away?
I believe these new version Kh-58s (with folding wings to fit in internal bays)are for future aircraft meant to penetrate the defended airspaces you are mentioning.
IMHO, the stealthy PAK-FA and UCAV programs under development are the more logical recipient platforms. They need to carry the missiles internaly in order not to compromise their stealth. Hence the new version of the Kh-58.
Again, who not? With the types range performance and payload I see no reason why not.
sealordlawrenceTo be honest, I don’t really see the Harrier as that good a CAS plane anyways. Were’t there some reports a while back which said that the British troops on the ground prefered to call in American CAS because the A10 is just so much better then the harrier?
If I was in charge, I’d drop the lot of them and bring in artillary. Since the British are essentially fighting a defensive battle in Iraq, range and reaction time would not be an issue (if anything, reaction time would probably be quicker). For offensive ops in Iraq or Afganistan, some self-propelled howitzers would do the fire support job far better and cheaper then any amount of harriers. With some apaches as rapid response and you have a powerful, mobile and above all, cheap firebase to give the troops some proper fire support.
Its not even like the Army would need to buy much new kit for this, and any additional costs would be more then made up for by the cost savings from reduced or even canceled harrier operations.
The army ditches the harriers for SP howitzers and more field guns, and hopefully find some pilots for its apaches, while the navy could get their sea harriers back to keep the fleet safe. Everyone is happy without needing to spend much more money.
Anyone see anything I missed that would make this impractical other then petty inter-branch politics? :confused:
More artillery is certainly an option, however this is yet another area where more investment would be useful. UK gun artillery is limited either to the light towed 105mm or to the heavy 155mm tracked braveheart system, neither is ideal for job. The canadians ordered a number of 155 M777s for use in in the ghan and they have excelled themselves. BAe has now developed a self propelled version of it mounted on a supacat chassis that would be perfect. Another potentially useful system is the Bofors (now owned by BAe) Archer, an armored all terrain truck mounting a 155mm.
The fact that the UK has made so few special purchases for the ghan campaign just shows the appalling level of competence of the MoD and UK government in general.
sealordlawrence“Wild Weasel” Blackjack….Yeah, right:D
Why not? It may be called upon to penetrate defended airspace and the capability could be called upon.
sealordlawrenceBetter than a piece of trash like the Whorenet (thanks Broncho)!
Hoo boy, you do like getting whacked about dont you? Go troll in another thread, twit.
With all dues respect Nick, The Super whorenet may be a piece of junk that was thrust upon the USN after all their cool toys got canned, but it has an advantage over the LCA in that it is in widespread USN service and has attained an export order. We have yet to see any concrete evidence that the LCA will be ordered in anywhere near the numbers that the MMRCA and Su-30 have/ will be and the latest reports of thrust problems do not inspire a massive amount of faith. I would love nothing better than for 100+ LCA’s with AESA and an indigenous BVRAAM to be ordered but it has yet to happen, that is of course not saying that it wont but in the mean time I think it is best to reserve judgment. That is not to say that the project has not had huge benefits for Indian industry and for the IAF all ready becouse it clearly has.
sealordlawrenceTheoretically, yes. Practically, no.
It is unlikely that the above long range missile carriers will be fitted with these anti-radiation missiles to do battle with an opponent’s SAM systems. They have other missions to do. The Tu-22M can carry it externaly anyways.
IMHO, this new version of the KH-58 is meant to be carried in the internal weapons bay of some future stealth aircraft (manned or unmanned).
I dont see it as that unlikely at all. There have been reports that the Russians want to upgrade the BlackJack fleet to carry various PGM’s and I see no reason why an ARM missile is not a possibility.
Sign In
