sealordlawrenceAnd how much NGS has the Royal Navy been doing in the last decade, pray?
The Darings can provide air-cover without being vulnerable from shore-based, short-ranged missile attack. You know in the modern era, anti-air missiles can have long ranges. 🙂
With all due respect Musashi the idea that the equipment fit of a vessel that will likely serve for nearly 40 years should be determined by the relatively limited experience of the previous decade seems rather dangerous to me.
The further in shore a DDG goes the further its air cover stretches over the shore, something which is useful for supporting amphibious operations, especially for the British who lack a land based MRSAM system. The fact that the destroyers in RN service are currently single role probably has more to do with the fact that they were built on a shoe string as single role vessels to start with and have very little room for upgrades. Saying that though the T-42s 4.5inch gun gives it the same NGS capability as its frigate counterparts. I think that NGS is a perfectly viable role for the T-45s, it may be rare that it is used but as the 2003 showed it is. BAe has proposed a 155mm gun that it claims will fit on the same mount (albeit with some modification) as the current 4.5inch. The ever increasing range of artillery projectiles enables a ship undertaking NGS to operate at significant distances out to sea, further more any major surface vessel is only likely to move inshore following the neutralisation of any land based AShM systems. In the ideal world the T-45s would have been delivered with BAe’s proposed 155mm, however this is not the ideal world but it is a little more ideal than when the T-42s were built. With so few surface ships left in the RN it makes sense to make them as multi-role as possible.
sealordlawrenceSorry Newforest I just caught your edit, the double decker was the one I was refering to. Thankyou for the link.;)
sealordlawrenceWould you be thinking of the V.1000 powered by the Conway by-pass engine?
Afraid not, the V.1000 was a 100 seat airliner version of the Valiant bomber. It reached prototype construction stage (apparently about 95%) before cancellation. It would have carried the designation VC-7, as that suggests it was in fact a predecessor to the VC-10 (the engines would have been buried in the wing roots comet style). The ‘Superb’ was a proposed further development of the VC-10.
sealordlawrenceNice thread however I think that the answer is easy in very general terms. The Phantom has proved to be one of the best and most enduring fighter designs yet. It had unparalleled versatility for its time and it still displays that. As to whether the F-4 or the F-104 was the better interceptor- there might be some debate to be had there but I would probably still fall on the side of the Phantom. A more interesting this versus that would be the F-4 versus the F8U-3 Crusader-3. Obviously in the A2G analysis the F-4 would be the better bird but in the A2A I think that a very good argument could be made for the Vought creation having the edge. However it is an argument I would try to stay out of as I have a special fondness for the crusader series, which would without doubt lead to bias.;)
sealordlawrenceWell last month it was Mig-31s Iran was going to be procuring, so I suppose this is just part of the fantasy land rumor cycle.:rolleyes:
Whilst swerves assertion that the petrol rationing is the result of a lack of refinery capacity is correct it should also be pointed out that the overall economic picture in Iran is less than perfect. In 2006 the Iranian government itself reckoned that nearly 50% of Iranians between the age of 25 and 29 were unemployed.
sealordlawrenceBuilding prototypes (& no work had begun on anything else) for testing & development is not generally counted as “in production”.
:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceThere is also a next generation Storm in the works.
Do you have any details on this?
Just my few cents but I do not think that it would harm the US defence industry for a few contracts to go abroad. Currently there are too few companies that assume (seemingly rightly) that they will get any contract they go for just becouse they are American.
sealordlawrenceWhat do you mean cannot shoot it down? Of course it can, with heat seeking missiles.
Well now IIR missiles like Mica-IR, ASRAAM etc. IIRC there was an article posted in the missile section about a US plan to fit the AIM-9X seeker on an AMRAAM. MBDA have made vague references to the possibility of an ARM version of Meteor, if such a weapon could be used in the A2A role along with IIR MRAAM’s combined with advanced sensors it opens the possibility of full multi spectrum A2A warfare. Obviously the Russians have been pursuing this for a while with the R-27 series but the new aircraft, Su-35, Rafale, Raptor, Typhoon, F-35 and Super Hornet with highly capable ECM and optical systems realy make it a possibility.
sealordlawrenceThe Handley Page HP111 was a transport based on the Victor which the Air Staff wanted but the government cancelled it two weeks before a general election and ordered the Belfast. Northern Ireland had high unemployment!
The HP111 had a double deck was capable of carrying 200 troops using both decks and cargo of to 24 tons could be carried on the lower deck which could be lowered to the ground for loading. It was 200 MPH faster than the Belfast and had a range of 3300 miles and the ability to land on 1000 yard grass strips! This undoubtably was another factor that caused Handley Page to collapse. These facts are from “Handley Page A History” by Alan Dowsett
printed by Tempus.
Ray
Thankyou very much super sioux, that is exactly what I was looking for! The HP.111 was, to the best of my knowledge a new fuselage with a highly modified wing, the ling with the Victor seems tenuous, probably to the same extent that humans and monkeys are related???:confused:
sealordlawrenceHow will IAF acquire its multi-role jets?
Damn it is becoming impossible to pick the right choice to provide the right balance between everything.
So who will be staying in this forum till 2040? ..:(
IIRC the Mig-35s life san is stated to be exactly 6000 hours.;)
sealordlawrenceWhich is what makes it all so tragic in the end, despite all the problems it faced during its development the program was at the point of moving towards success.
There are an awful lot of British aviation projects that could be said about.
P.1154
Avro 730
Shorts Belfast
Vickers VC-7
Westland Westminster
to name just a few.
sealordlawrence9 development aircraft & 11 pre-production aircraft had been ordered. Two prototypes had been completed, of which one had flown. Three others were nearly complete. The other four prototypes were in various stages of assembly. “In production” is pushing it a bit, I reckon. At an advanced stage of development, I’d say.
I would say in production fits just right.
sealordlawrenceIsrael to advance F-16, Black Hawk upgrades
The Israeli air force is to enhance the combat effectiveness of its 125 Lockheed Martin F-16C/D fighters, to modify its Sikorsky UH-60 utility helicopters for attack duties by launching the Armed Black Hawk programme.
Israel’s F-16C/Ds are to receive the same avionics equipment integrated with its new-generation F-16Is, with this intended to boost commonality and allow the aircraft to remain in use until at least 2020.
The air force says the upgrade, which has already undergone flight test using an F-16D, will also enable the older aircraft to carry new weapons slated for integration with its eventual fleet of 102 two-seat F-16Is, more than half of which are now in service.
Likely beneficiaries of the upgrade include Elbit Systems’ Elisra and Elop subsidiaries and Israel Aerospace Industries’ Elta Systems division, with the modifications likely to be conducted by the air force’s 22 depot.
Israel opted to launch the Armed Black Hawk programme after cutting short a programme to upgrade and buy new Boeing AH-64A/D Apache attack helicopters last year.
Work will start in September involving Elbit’s Cyclone subsidiary, with a prototype aircraft scheduled to undergo flight testing from April-May 2008.
The modified Black Hawk will carry command and control systems, electronic warfare equipment and Rafael Spike-ER air-to-surface missiles, and be capable of striking targets from a range of up to 8km (4.3nm).
This is especially interesting, it will dramatically increase the capability of the Israeli AF. I would be surprised if we did not eventually see the Elta 2052 AESA radar on Israeli lawndarts.
sealordlawrenceFinally. You asked the questions and then used sarcasm against a person who was attemting to provide you with answers, was that necessary?
EDITED
Furthermore US carriers in the cold war often operated a wide variety of types including the vigilante.
sealordlawrenceYes, but the design work was still unfinished for lack of funds. A firm order had not been placed.
A subsequent design was made in the 1960s, and it looked like it would go ahead. But then Labour won the election and capped defence spending – this pressure and attacks from the RAF finished the carrier plan off.
In comparison, the CVF design is pretty much complete, and there is no fear of the Conservatives coming in and capping defence spending like Labour did.
So? TSR2 was in production when it was cancelled. It does not require a new government to end the CVF project. It would take just a stroke of a pen, defence spending is not ‘capped’ anymore, programs just get cancelled or cut back because they cost too much. Look how T-45 has gone.
Sign In
