dark light

Peter G

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 391 through 405 (of 803 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2019238
    Peter G
    Participant

    Varyag wasn’t fitted with engines or a rudders:
    http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/varyag.asp

    Its probably slightly harder than upsizing, but doable.

    in reply to: The Brand New IAF Thread (VIII) – Flamers NOT Welcome. #2417528
    Peter G
    Participant

    I was going to ask about the ODL datalink. According to the links below, the contract has been awarded to IAI and should enter service by 2012.

    IAI has experience with using radios for datalinks and the Su-30MKI already has a glass cockpit.

    http://www.domain-b.com/defence/air_space/iaf/20090120_iai_bags_contract.html
    http://indiadefenceonline.com/281/indian-air-force-rejects-rafael%E2%80%99s-free-offer-bid-for-operational-data-link-project/

    Possibly based on or developments of?:
    http://www.iai.co.il/33786-38692-en/ELTA.aspx
    http://www.iai.co.il/33787-29421-en/ELTA.aspx

    I’m guessing its similar to MIDS/Link 16 which will display similar to radar display. Its been confirmed for A-50, Su-30MKI and ground stations, and Im guessing both MiG-29/Mirage 2000 updates. Surely its planned to display air, ground and sea targets? It would mean a software upgrade to integrate the datalink and displays, but the aircraft will be receiving updates all through its life.

    Cutting down on standard voice communications is a good think, it allows the A-50 to direct more interceptors at one time, communications are quicker and more secure from jamming. The aircraft will be more survivable as threat warnings will not be drowned out in many voice calls. It will also interceptors to make silent intercepts in some cases – ODL brings the aircraft close to the target, then the IRST takes over.

    Some datalinks can pass imagery – maybe the SU-30MKI can pass EL/M-2060P SAR shots and EO images also?

    Link 16 is used by Army, Navy and Air Forces – will ODL be used by the Indian Navy?

    in reply to: Tanker Draft RFP party #2433184
    Peter G
    Participant

    NONE of which have anywhere near the requirements of the US.

    RAAF requirement was offload 54500 kg (120151 lbs) at 900 nm with 90 minutes on station. Also 200 passengers er aircraft (important when deploying troops overseas). The 5 tankers are support two constant fighter CAPs at 216 nm. Lastly capable of deploying 12 fighters to Butterworth in Malaysia.

    What where the requirements for the UK, India, Saudi Arabia & UAE?

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2433185
    Peter G
    Participant

    The Mirage 2000N is fitted with a nuclear weapons cockpit armament panel. This is not fitted in day to day operations, only when the ASMP is loaded.

    in reply to: Tanker Draft RFP party #2433197
    Peter G
    Participant

    Yea it’d be from FMS credits – the requirement is for 2-4 KC-767. Their domestic defence budget is already maxed out paying for new systems. The Boeing 707 are t remain in service for the future (to be given airframe and engine upgrade for further 25 years service).

    in reply to: More good JSF news and program updates #2433350
    Peter G
    Participant

    Japan starting to look at F-35 option:
    http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdi/jdi091007_1_n.shtml

    in reply to: Tanker Draft RFP party #2433370
    Peter G
    Participant

    And India – although selected, the contract hasn’t been signed. However contender in this case was Il-78MK, not KC-767.

    Israel did request 2 KC-767 in a sole source contract in 2008, but was refused. These probably still feature in future plans, but are as much an extension of existing Boeing 767 experience in Israel (El Air is an all Boeing airline supported by Bedek for maintenance). Note the Boeing 767-200 MMTT:
    http://www.iai.co.il/33166-34243-en/Bedek_AircraftandPrograms_ProductsandServices_Tailored.aspx

    MMTT pdf link:
    http://www.iai.co.il/33169-34671-en/Bedek_AircraftandPrograms_ProductsandServices_Special_Conversion.aspx

    You really want short takeoff capability and a tanker that will fit two to a KC-767 parking area? How about the Gulfstream G550 fitted with a boom, itself refueled by KC-30/KC-10?

    G550 TST fuel is 25000 kg (55155 lbs). Offload is 18800 kg (19400 lbs) at 1000 km (540 nm) radius.

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2019461
    Peter G
    Participant

    Friedman’s World Naval Weapon Systems has:

    Sea Dart – 46.3-55.5 km.

    Sea Wolf/GWS 25 (sextuple launcher) is 5 km
    Sea Wolf/GWS 26 (VL) is 7.5 km

    Sea Wolf Block 2 uses improved control surfaces for longer range
    Sea Wolf/GWS 25: 8 km
    Sea Wolf/GWS 26: 10 km

    Aster 15
    1.7-12 km vs sea skimming missile (subsonic or supersonic) or supersonic aircraft
    15-17 km against high altitude aircraft/missiles
    Altitude vs diving missile 14 km
    Maximum range 30 km (Maritime patrol aircraft, etc)
    Average speed 800 m/s

    Aster 30: The booster is optomised for high acceleration against low altitude Mach 2.5 sea skimming missiles
    3-35 km vs supersonic sea skimming missile
    3-50 km vs supersonic fighter/subsonic sea skimmer
    70 km against high altitude fighter
    Altitude vs diving missile 22 km
    Maximum range 120 km (Maritime patrol aircraft, etc)
    Average speed 800 m/s

    in reply to: Rafale News VII #2433457
    Peter G
    Participant

    Mirage 2000 training was 70% nuclear, 30% conventional attack a few years back. AFAIK only EC 3/4 will be equipped with ASMP-A.

    EC 1/91 (Rafale) should be operational with ASMP-A in mid-2010. They are also tasked with air to ground and interception tasks.

    Two-three more Rafale squadrons are due to stand up 2010-2011 – would make 4-5 total.

    As already mentioned the 234 (84 Rafale B, 150 Rafale C) have been cut to 228. I think its 8 Rafale squadrons total?

    Can anyone confirm the following:
    Mirage F1CT (interceptor/attack) retired from frontline service mid 2009.

    Mirage F1CR (recon/attack with ER 1/33, ER 2/33) retired 2009/2010 or 2012/2014. EC 1/7 (Rafale) should be operational with Reco NG pod in 2010.

    Mirage 2000C
    EC 2 retired its last aircraft in 1998.
    EC 2/5 remains as OCU?
    EC 2/12 went July 2009, EC 1/12 is due 2010?

    Mirage 2000D due to retired 2025+?
    Still to receive the Mica IR to replace Magic 2?

    Mirage 2000N due to retire 2018?
    Still to receive the Mica IR to replace Magic 2?

    Mirage 2000-5F
    EC 2/2 went July 2007, leaving EC 1/2 – due to go 2021?

    in reply to: Tanker Draft RFP party #2433562
    Peter G
    Participant

    And the not so hidden costs of the tankers:
    http://sanantonio.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stories/2009/09/28/daily44.html

    Hm, Northrop Grumman defeats Boeing. Boeing considering a protest… Some kind of trend? :rolleyes:

    in reply to: Tanker Draft RFP party #2433714
    Peter G
    Participant

    Over the next 20 years the USAF is changing its aircraft and hence doctrine.

    As C-5 are retired, the C-17 will take up more and more of the long range missions. These will require additional tanking.

    P-8A (refueled by boom) replaces P-3C (cannot be refueled). Depends on how the USN operate these – will they use the refueling capability? Yes. How much? Who knows.

    The F-22 and F-35 cannot use external drop tanks during the ‘first week of war’ (beating down the SA-10s, etc). They will require additional topping up before doing the deep strike thing.

    And of course the KC-X can itself be tanked (as can the KC-10, 8 KC-135R(RT) and around 43 KC-135T).

    Its a no brainer the USAF needs a larger tanker, but numbers have also dropped. There were more tankers available in 1991 than today.

    When do we hear back from Northrop/EADS and Boeing?

    We will not see these factored in – these are the classified war scenarios mentioned in the RFP.

    in reply to: Tanker Draft RFP party #2433968
    Peter G
    Participant

    Just cleaning some notes up and found the original planned KC-767 delivery dates for the USAF. These would have replaced the KC-135E.

    2005: 5 delivered.
    2006: 6 delivered
    2007-10: 20 each year
    2011: 5 delivered.

    Oh well. IOC for the new is 2017?

    Fairchild, Grand Folks and MacDill were each to receive 32.

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2019720
    Peter G
    Participant

    Steve,

    Check out the EL/M-2022 PDF:
    http://www.iai.co.il/33693-35738-en/ELTA.aspx

    Page 2 (Image 5) shows an ISAR image of an merchant ship at 82 nm (150 km). Still not at nice range to be at…. The movie also explains how ISAR is used.

    During the Falklands war the RAF reported the Argentinean aircraft carrier based on the Searchwater ISAR/Nimrod (1979 in service date). The RAF didn’t report is was a single ship – they reported is a carrier. In fact is was a neutral tanker. If the RAF had reported it was single ship, the RN could have requested additional information….

    in reply to: Russian Navy News & Discussion, Part III #2019729
    Peter G
    Participant

    Asking people to clarify points or, god forbid, give sources for statements is not contributing?

    TASM had a simpled PID (passive ID device) that was hardwired to one kind of Russian radar – it could not be changed. It was also subsonic. Actual range was in the order of 450 nm, but practical range was 250 nm due it being subsonic (20-30 minutes from being fired to arriving). It had a search pattern option also.

    P-700 has different options (scout missile, hi-lo options, supersonic speed etc) compared with TASM.

    I’ve never heard any ISAR ranges mentioned anywhere and so was after a source.

    I’m a little pressed for time over the next couple of weeks, so when I do post something with some research behind it its a little discouraging when someone says something like: “No, the thing you’ve researched for the last hour, and provided sources, does not exist” – this has lead to me to consider that its a waste for time debating some issues.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Part Deux #2434193
    Peter G
    Participant

    ‘RSK MIG’ needs the money, so a Mig-29K order is good news from that perspective. I wouldn’t be surprised if we soon hear of an order for further Mig-29 SMTs or Mig-35s

    Some news…

    Anyone know what this might be?

    Janes suggest the first use of GPS guided bombs (KAB-500S?):
    http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw091005_1_n.shtml

Viewing 15 posts - 391 through 405 (of 803 total)