sealordlawrenceEhem no, really not Sudan has giant oil reserves sells a lot to China and had the money to purchase 24 Fulcrums. This is not a question about strategy, limited resources but rather about desperateness and a panic situation as the rebels had already reached the outskirts of the capital Khartoum. I really wish someone would read my posts 🙁
Ehem yes, go and post a full inventory of the sudanese airforce, a breakdown of the internal security situation, the defence budget and overall economic performance. Add to that indicators of social well being. Then come back and take back that stupid post, if you dont know what you are talking about dont post.:mad::mad::mad:
sealordlawrenceDid the russians embargo them? It should have been easy to pick up a few Mi-17’s.
Why are you so confused by this? The Migs were used as an additional asset because they were not needed to any A2A mission. Sudan has helicopters just not many and while the fulcrum is not an ideal A2G platform for unguided munitions in the way that a Frogfoot is it is still a potent asset as the example I gave in first post points out. Sudans resources are highly limited and the use of a hand full of fulcrums produces a massive increase in combat capability. Sudan is far from the only country to use A2A platforms in the A2G role. Welcome to world of African warfare.
sealordlawrenceYou can rig a Mi-8/17 with UB-57 rockets and it would do a better job.
There is a shortage of them too, and given that they fly slower and present large targets it is likely that they would have suffered a similar if not worse casualty rate.
sealordlawrenceStupidity!! Why is an air to air fighter doing an attack choppers job.
Because there is a shortage of attack helos in Sudan and the Fulcrums were not needed for air superiority missions.
sealordlawrence1) The UK signed up to cluster bomb ban because Gordon Brown was having a bad week and he needed some good press. Cluster bombs have a reputation as baby killers and banning them is a politically popular move, thus the UK signed up.
2) If a real war ever broke out again (highly unlikely for at least the next quarter of a century) be in no doubt that if they were felt to be useful operationally they would be brought back into service.
3) Like Fedaykin said, the armed forces will adapt to not having them, this certainly is not the end of the world although this decision coming within a week of the cancellation of a major MLRS project cancellation does not send out a great message on that front.
4) Operationally, given the increasing proliferation and ever decreasing size of PGM’s my suspicion is that in the medium to long term cluster bombs days are numbered anyway.
sealordlawrenceHeavy machine-guns brought it down? Must of been training his Sudanese novice in the art of close up inspections while flying low and slow…
Mud moving, Africa is distinctly short of PGM’s so you have to go in low and slow. There is a famous occasion from the Ethiopia-Eritrea war where an Su-27 hit a convoy.
I also very much doubt he was training anyone, mercenary most likely. Whilst I dont disregard his profession and agree that his death is regrettable the fact is that it comes with the territory. Their very high wages are danger money not celebrity money.
As for bad news for Mig, not really, one dodgy seat in a likely second hand (or at least old in the sense it sat in the factory for a long time) basic Fulcrum variant operated by an underfunded and in all probability not very technically competent air force is unlikely to undermine the only competition that matters for Mig and that is the Mig-35 in the Indian MMRCA contest.
sealordlawrenceThe current world-wide market is moving to:
a) multi-role auxiliaries (amphibs with RAS and sealift functionality for example).
b) OPVs of various armament levels (including in German exports); increased EEZ control demand
c) renewal of conventional fleets, with new emphasis on multi-role capability, and land-attack.F125 fits into b) as a top-level tie-off, with limited capability in c).
Well thats a really useful comment isnt it, the world wide market is moving towards everything……….with that level of insight it is hardly surprising that German shipyards have lost so much ground to Spain and France in recent years.:rolleyes:
And your analysis is aweful, F125 does no fit into either of those categorys, it is a Germany specific hybrid.
(little side-note: the above is pretty much verbatim from a TKMS Surface Division board member)
Dont try and name drop, this is an internet forum, you could be anyone and claim anything so name dropping is petty pathetic and pointless.
sealordlawrenceThe portfolio is not mandated by what the export customers want, but what they might want, once you prod them in the right direction.
A well-rounded portfolio, in particular in the strong points of export (frigates, submarines) is seen as necessary to compete – hence the F125 is in.
Putting the F125 design into the portfolio isn’t a compromise by the German Navy, it would be a compromise for a prospective buyer. Much like with a F124.If you have an organic shipbuilding industry, you rarely if ever do “compromises”, internationally. You don’t select your ships from the portfolio of your industry anyway (unless you’re short of cash) – instead you go and hand em a 1000+ page requirements draft.
Or do you see e.g. the Type 45, LCS or FREMM being designed based on their export chances?
In the case of FREMM, yes I do. Hence the extreme flexibility. Your knowledge of warship export is woeful, even a cursory glance at recent warship export procurements shows that there is little place for the F125. Virtually all such procurements have been of (as you very poorly phrase it) ‘conventional warfare ships’ and amphibious vessels, not hybrids.
The below is what I have been saying all along and it proves that you are just repeating what I say and trying to argue for the sake of it;
‘If you have an organic shipbuilding industry, you rarely if ever do “compromises”, internationally. You don’t select your ships from the portfolio of your industry anyway (unless you’re short of cash) – instead you go and hand em a 1000+ page requirements draft.’
Start reading and stop trolling.
sealordlawrenceYou miss the point somewhat. F125 is the only ship that TKMS can offer (in that size class) as a MIO/surveillance/land-attack multi-role ship with organic naval infantry and SF support, and the only ship in the TKMS portfolio optimized for extremely high mission times (2 years in-theater, 210+ days at sea per year).
Neither Meko-D nor Meko-X offer similar capabilities in those fields, they’re paper exercises for “conventional” warfare.
No I dont, you are just arguing for the sake of it.
How many export customers want that capability?:rolleyes:
The Germans have more than enough design capacity and existing products to not have to compromise the F125 for the German navy.
sealordlawrenceThe point is that Germany itself doesn’t use the MEKO line. German ships (F123, F124, F125, K130) are customized ships derived from MEKO and using MEKO technology, but never themselves part of the MEKO portfolio. MEKO is essentially OTS, and Germany simply doesn’t compromise to buying OTS.
However, in particular F124 has been targetted as a potential export – without success so far (Australia, Greece). This is interesting in particular as it directly targets TKMS own prospects with the Meko-D and Meko-X, which are purely draft designs and have never been in any tenders so far really.
A “F125” for the Netherlands would of course look decidedly different in outfit. If they ever went for it (unlikely), a strike-length Mk41 would be likely for example, to support Tomahawks. EADS components would be significantly reduced and replaced by Thales components. Instead of 33-foot RIBs, LCVP Mk5s could be installed. And so on.
I also wouldn’t be suprised btw if TKMS offered a somewhat larger F125 derivative for C2 for example, if that ever takes off. With similar modifications as above.
MEKO-D is essentially a follow-up design to MEKO A200, and is marketed as a similar-sized but better-equipped alternative to the A200. However, the design is by now 6 years old, and has failed to attract even remote interest (not that there is noticable marketing at all!).
MEKO-X is essentially the TKMS attempt to break into the large destroyer market, to have something in their portfolio comparable to Type 45 or Horizon. Unless a customer specifically asks TKMS for a tender in a ship class of this size, it’s doubtful MEKO X will ever be more than a paper design, just like MEKO CSL.Actively marketed MEKO designs are A100, A200, Sentinel, Guardian. F124 currently serves as a top-off for AAW to the portfolio, since the only other MEKO design for that is the MEKO X paper design. F125 can similarly fit into the portfolio as a top-off for MIO/surveillance roles above in particular the Sentinel and Guardian OPVs.
We’ll probably also see a more modularized multi-role design actively marketed sometime soon in the lower bracket (ie below A100), to accomodate the newest BWB/Marine fade of MMC ships for K131 (similar to how TKMS fired the first shot with the “Meko Multirole Auxiliary” in their MHD/MRD portfolio for JSS).
Yes that is the point, thankyou for pointlessly repeating it with far more information than was actually required.:rolleyes:
sealordlawrenceI kind of think the entire MEKO concept was to build and market a family of modular warships that can be tailored to varying customer needs. The whole MEKO thing is the business of selling warships.
You got the concept but are unable to make the vital link. The Meko family has more than enough designs and variations to fulfill the export requirement, Mek-100, Meko-200 and the Meko-D/X as concepts for the future. Thus there is no need to compromise the needs of the German navy in order to satisfy the fantasies of internet fanboys. If ThyssenKrupp wants to compete on the international market it does not need to offer the F-125 unless someone really wants it.
sealordlawrenceWith all due respect why even bother trying to export it? Given the export and design portfolio that German yards have I see no reason whatsoever to market the F-125 on the international market unless there happens to be a country come along with very convergent needs.
sealordlawrenceGenerally speaking I have a hard time seeing a 3500 tons vessel of LCS’ mission as multirole (even FREMM sized units). The closest modern day multirole vessel of LCS size is the La Fayette, which are very nice ships, but unsuitable against a “peer competitor”. And the USN doesn’t want to keep LCS in the stable when the dragon roams, right?
Finally got some time on my hands to chuck in my own two cents here!
When the Dragon roams the LCS will be used as an ASW platform with limited self defence capability that is to be covered by the larger and much more capable DDG’s, in much the same way that the OHP’s were used when the Bear roamed. This leads me to a much wider point;
There is no need to turn LCS into an all singing all dancing multirole FREMM type vessel. The USN has/will have 80+ Aegis DDG’s with ESSM, SM-6, SM-3 etc. This will ultimately be backed up by USN and USMC hornets and F-35’s. Area Air Defence is more than covered. The same applies to shore bombardment, the same air assets combined with the DDG’s 5inch guns with extended range munitions, Tomahawks, SSN/SSGN, and USMC Cobras makes naval fire support dealt with, not to mention DDG-1000 and what ever comes out of the chaos that is the future cruiser/destroyer studies.
With all due respect to everybody here there seems to be a tendency to try and turn the LCS into a mini DDG-1000. That is not the model that LCS is kind of/was/should have been built around. The model (as with so much else) is Gulf War 1. Allied naval forces crept up the Gulf engaging in blockade duties, MCM, small boat hunting, oil rig seizing, picking up downed pilots, and minor amphibious operations against small Islands. The effect was threefold, the waters of the Gulf were shutdown to all Iraqi waterborne assets of any size or shape, the way was cleared for a possible amphibious assault and the point was made that the coalition was very serious. rightfully so ASW has been added to this list of tasks. The vessels used for these roles were less than perfect but they got the job done. LCS should be perfect for it and in its current form (ie what is actually planned and funded) it more or less is. LCS is not intended to heavy fire support or even be the primary escort for heavy amphibious ships. Its function is littoral dominance in advance of the heavy forces. Fire support should and will come from the DDG’s and air assets. The point, there is no need for LCS to be loaded up with VLS cells, heavy guns and high spec radars as its role does not demand them.
LCS needs to able to handle;
1)AShM’s launched at short range (thus very little reaction time) so anything beyond ESSM (maybe even including) is a waste.
2)Small boats, as shown in GW1 helicopters are best suited for active hunting whilst medium calibre guns are suitable for defence.
3)Submarines, sonars and helos are best used.
4)Mines, same as above plus some other nifty gear
5)Very limited raiding, boarding and amphibious capability, so helos, small boats and accommodation for a detachment of troops.
Currently it can more or less do this, for funding reasons there are some deficiencys. The issue with the LCS program is that the USN has taken the most expensive option available to fulfill the mission and now it is in serious trouble. Thus I return to my previous point about the LCS being ordered as a high-spec frigate with Littoral capabilities. However with that said it was an OHP that most famously undertook this role for the USN during the first Gulf War.
sealordlawrenceWhat state of the art SAMs? It was only the media spinning about all the Russian SAMs being delivered and operated. The Israelis took the path of least resistance to a target with no air defence system. The Syrians took the gamble on not directly protecting the site and lost. The strike package used and skirted Turkish airspace and through areas where there was no air defence system. The Syrians can’t protect every part of their airspace and the Israelis know it.
TJ
Precisely, no one flys through an AD system unless they have to.
sealordlawrenceyeah cos a coroner knows all about aircraft saftey more then the RAF, honestly this whole thing is becoming seriously retarded when a coroner thinks he knows more then the RAF do about the nimrod especially when he claims ‘the planes have never been airworthy’, i guess decades of flying blows that little myth away. Big pile of BS from the ‘aviation expert’ (sniggers) coroner basically.
Well we can be sure he knows more than you.:rolleyes:
fact is that the Nimrod fleet is a vital asset and the MoD is never going to admit to a problem unless its back is against the wall. The nimrod program, as it stands now, is an appalling state and representative of the perpetual gross incompetence of the UK MoD.:mad:
Sign In
