dark light

Peter G

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 803 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: F-35 News thread. Part Deux #2286950
    Peter G
    Participant

    AFA magazine article

    F-35 can supercruise at Mach 1.2. Other good info.

    http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.aspx

    in reply to: RuAF News and Development Thread part 10 #2289655
    Peter G
    Participant

    I’m struggling with finding decent photos of the Su-30SM. From what I can make out it has thrust vectoring, but no canards?

    in reply to: Lynx #2298443
    Peter G
    Participant

    AH9 is 16 new plus 8 conversions from AH7.

    The RN Wildcat HMA1 Seaspray 7400 radar also has overland modes – SAR and GMTI….

    in reply to: Lynx #2298556
    Peter G
    Participant

    AH9 were originally Light Utility Helicopter compared with attack AH7 TOW.

    Although they can both lift 6 heavily equipped troops or 9 passengers, AH9 slung load is 2000 kg, compared with AH7 1360 kg. AH9A was later upgraded again with CTS800-4N (Wildcat engines) with payload with slung load to 2360 kg

    AH7 had option of 12.7mm mg from 2003, AH9 from 2008. Both can outrange RPGS and light arms.

    Wildcat AH1 will also have option of 7.62mm or 12.7mm mg. Planned roles are utility, recon, casualty evacuation, CP, logistic and troop transport. There are no plans for missiles. Roles are recon and light lift.

    in reply to: AH-64 Vs Air-Defence #2302258
    Peter G
    Participant

    Before the AH-64D entered service the US Army flew test missions against high threat ground threats (this was 1996). Eight AH-64A and six AH-64D took part in the trials.

    Ground threat was 20 M1A1, 20 M2, six 2S6, two SA-8B, one SA-11, three SA-13, one SA-15, 10 SA-18 and Swedish Giraffe radar. They also used smoke, RF/IR blankets, conformal RAM camouflage netting, decoys, corner reflectors and active jammers.

    The Apaches did not use the standard SEAD or artillery support (the test was to compare the two models). They flew the seven close attack and five deep attack times at night only.

    AH-64A scored 75 kills and lost 28 aircraft. They also made 34 blue on blues. (friendly fire).
    AH-64D scored 300 kills and lost 4 aircraft. No blue on blues.

    In its doctrinal manuals the US Army acknowledges the deep strike is a high risk move. For more on 2003 action, see page 235 of this document: http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/OnPointI.pdf

    in reply to: Air to air combat , helicopter venus jet fighter #2302273
    Peter G
    Participant

    US claims form Gulf War in 1991: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_engagements_of_the_Gulf_War#USAF_A-10A_vs._IRAF_Bo-105
    Although these are mainly transport helicopters. Didn’t a number of UK helicopters get downed by Pucara aircraft in 1982?

    ISTR the F-15E LGB kill was recorded on LANTIRN pod. This was against a hovering suprised helo.

    BTW helo blades spin at something like 400 rpm (they need to subsonic). Its not so much the blades as the rotor head that shows up on radar. Case in point the RAH-66 and its cleaned up rotor head.

    The E-8C with its radar in MTI can detect helicopters, and rotating ground radars (6-10 rpm). It can also classify targets as a helicopter due its rotating blades and stationary radars operating.

    in reply to: Indian Navy : News & Discussion – V #2011183
    Peter G
    Participant

    SSBN photo

    Okay not a very good one, but:
    http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/09/arihant.php#more-5550

    As per the entry, it does look like they slide the cover open to use to the crane. Probably fitting her out.

    in reply to: Typhoon News & Discussions VII #2308911
    Peter G
    Participant

    AAM loadouts

    Standard air loadout seems to be 4 IRIS-T or 4 ASRAAM and 4 Meteor (8 AAM) total. A couple of questions:

    1) There is talk of a 6 AIM-120 (and eventually Meteor) loadout. Is this a cleared load out or a future aspiration.
    http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_Eurofighter_underview_lg.jpg

    2) Any photos of 4 AIM-9 being carried at the same time?

    3) Are the innermost wing hardpoints (not visible in photos above) planned for AAM?

    4) Is the Litening targeting pod planned for taking one of the AIM-120 fuselage points in the future? This was the plan, although currently carried on the centreline.

    5) There was a photo of 6 IRIS-T being carried with two on the outer most HP, then 2 each next inner most. Is there a similar photo of the ASRAAM?

    in reply to: Site down! Site down! Chinese Military Aviation Gone? #2314592
    Peter G
    Participant

    Thanks for the update!

    in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News & Discussions VI #2304915
    Peter G
    Participant

    Whats Strongbow?

    in reply to: F-35B or F-35C for the Royal Navy #2021073
    Peter G
    Participant

    I appretiate what this thread is trying to do, discuss which F35 to purchase, as far as I am aware we do not know yet if the C can actually land on a carrier due to the hook problems and we do not know what weight the B can bring back, I am sure that the MOD cannot afford to dump smart weapons in the sea if they haven’t been expended.

    Agree. Planned F-35B bringback is small – 2 300 lb AMRAAM, 2 1000 lb bombs plus ~2500 lbs landing reserve fuel = 5100 lbs (2313 kg with fuel or 1180 kg weapons). Rolling landing would add 2000 lbs or 2540 kg weapons. USMC requirement is two AMRAAM, two GBU-32 and reserve fuel.

    F-35C is something like 8000 lbs bringback – 2000 lbs fuel or 6000 lbs weapons (2720 kg).

    A single Storm Shadow weighs 1300 kg. They could reduce the fuel carried by the Storm Shadow for a decrease in range and recover with two (just). One is possibly too much of an asymmetric load.

    So if shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) works it pretty well eliminates the bringback differences between the two aircraft.

    in reply to: Second Dash 8 for UAE Air Force through SNN #2326962
    Peter G
    Participant

    Any idea on which weapons it will carry? I cannot see any weapon hardpoints.

    in reply to: Why is NH-90 and Tigre failures? #2298101
    Peter G
    Participant

    The French Navy seem impressed with the Caiman in the SAR role.

    in reply to: Good Grief – It's the Gripen! #2301786
    Peter G
    Participant

    The original Gripen A/B entered service in November 1997 (delayed by FBW problems). It first replaced the attack AJ 37 Viggen. AIM-120B entered service in mid 1999. Final FBW software was released 2000 for full agility and automatic recovery from stalls (said to be 20% more agile).

    JAS 39A was never fitted with a jammer – EW was AR380 RWR and BOP decoys only. Two seat JAS 39B lacks gun and is less agile with reduced fuel.

    More agile than F-15C, F-16AM and MiG-29. F-15C has higher T?W ratio, but Gripen is unstable design with canards. ITR is 30°/second, STR 20°/second. F-16AM is 20 and 18, MiG-29 is 23.5 and 21.

    Gripen was designed for pointing the nose as opposed to sustained dogfightings – lacks thrust in any case.

    It was biased towards the air defense role.
    Advantages are datalink, high readiness, survivability (EW, small size, BAS 90 basing). With 6 AAM RCS s 1/3rd F-16, 1/5th F/A-18C and 1/2 Mirage 2000C.
    Disadvantages are small size with little room for growth, lower payload and range.

    Batch 1 (28 JAS 39A, 1 JAS-39B) had D-80 radar processor (only the antenna was based on Bue Vixen) had range of around 100 km and could enagage 4 targets with AMRAAM (radar range nothing special). Batch 2 Gripen A/B had EP-80 processor for improved radar performance (96/14 A/B).

    Gripen C/D was based on Batch 2 and adds Litening III, recon pod.
    It entered service in January 2004.
    EWS 39 jammer was added 2008-2009 (see ‘Swiss report’).
    Material Standard 19 was added 2009-2010 (entered service May 09) with improved RWR, NATO IFF/comms (see ‘Swiss report’), Cobra HMD (250 IRIS-T delivered Nov 09 on)
    Some were fitted with Link 16 under MS 19.5 from May 2010.
    MS20 will probably add Meteor capability with two way datalink. Rb99 (AIM-20B are die to be retired 2015-2018).
    There are further radar improvements, but the planned vs actual is a little murky.

    Like RAF Eurofighter Tranche 1 and French Naval Rafale F1 the JAS 39A/B will be retired (this year) due to obsolescent equipment, lack of budget and force drawdowns. Some Batch 2 will be updated to C/D standards.

    in reply to: Why is NH-90 and Tigre failures? #2301839
    Peter G
    Participant

    NH90 was delayed by having 25 variants, 5 assembly lines and 3500 unforeseen customer requirements.

    Source: Flight International 24-30 October 2006

    That’s how popular it is – all the above occurred before the first helo had entered service.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 803 total)