dark light

Peter G

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 803 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Possible RAN-JMSDF sub replacement program? #2034144
    Peter G
    Participant

    The decision was made in July 1996 to not retrofit AIP as the indiscretion ratio was so low due to higher powered diesels:

    Upholder has two 2035 bhp diesels (4070 total) driving two 2500 kW alternators (5000 kW).
    Collins has three diesels (6000 bhp total).
    Oyashio has two 1700 bhp diesels (3400 total) driving two 1850 kW alternators (3700 kW).
    Yuushio has two 1700 bhp diesels (3400 total) driving two alternators (2840 kW total).
    Kilo has two 1825 bhp diesels (3650 total).
    Walrus has three 2300 bhp diesels (6900 total) driving three alternators (2940 kW total).

    AIP was looked at, and may have even had a small testbed, but ‘pallets sitting at ASC’ – where does info this come from?

    in reply to: Possible RAN-JMSDF sub replacement program? #2034197
    Peter G
    Participant

    Probably not. The RAN has access to much USN submarine technology – does the US want to pass these to Japan?

    in reply to: Rafale news VI #2503678
    Peter G
    Participant

    Again Eurofighter (well RAF and Saudi…) and Rafale have laser warning sensors which would be set off by laser rangefinders.

    Weren’t they claiming the could launch on Link 16/MIDS only?

    DIRCM (uses laser to overload IRH seekers) is already planned for the F-35, and I think mentioned for a potential Rafale upgrade.

    in reply to: Rafale news VI #2503689
    Peter G
    Participant

    In 1999 Yugoslav MiG-29 were easily downed by AMRAAM. The AMRAAM would approach, turn on its active radar seeker close in. The RWR only had a brief moment to alert the pilots before the missile would impact.

    Some recent aircraft EW suites can actually detect AAM mid-course datalinks. Eurofighter is supposed to be able to do this, as SPECTRA covers the same frequencies I’m guessing it can also detect AAM datalinks.

    The MiG-35 SOAR passive MAWS is rated against 10 km MANPAD, 30 km AAM, 50 km SAM – they’ll detect the initial launch of a missile at these ranges. SPECTRA also uses a passive MAWS, whereas Eurofighter went with an active one.

    In the scenario above, the Rafale SPECTRA has already detected the APG-63/70 radar whilst its in search mode, detects the mid-course AMRAAM datalink and alerts the pilot (or if close enough the MAWS detects the missile launch).

    I’m unsure of OSF laser rangefinder range, but it would only be 10-20 km?

    in reply to: Type 45 to put to sea without missiles #2038721
    Peter G
    Participant

    Daring will concentrate on ship system trials till early 2011, Dauntless will fire the first Sea Viper in late 2010, Daring is planned to follow in early 2011 and deploy shortly after. In an emergency they could bring the system into service earlier.

    Nothing unusual about extended ship trials on the first of class. Also they’ll be getting CEC in 2014, which is good news.

    http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0809/the_type_45_destroyer.aspx

    in reply to: F-4M FGR Mk.2 versus EE F.6 Lightning #2452599
    Peter G
    Participant

    No Lightning versions were ever fitted with decoys, RWR or radar jammer.

    The Phantoms upgrades are something like
    1969: Entered service with RAF
    1975: Fitted with ARI.18228 RWR
    1979: Fitted with Sky Flash vice AIM-7E2 Sparrow
    late 80s: Fitted with ALE-40 decoy dispensers
    1988: AIM-9L vice AIM-9G

    Whilst in RAFG service they would cruise at 2000-3000 feet and could detect and engage targets from ground level to 70,000 feet. Thats ground hugging Su-24 and up.

    Peter G
    Participant

    Sounds like the Dutch make quite terrible pilots.

    No the math is waaaay off!

    Netherlands received 217 F-16A/B between 1979 and 1992:
    http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article8.html

    They lost something like 18 by 1990. The majority due to engine failure, bird strikes or low altitude or mid-air collisions. They trained hard at low altitude and suffered losses due to it.
    http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/mishaps-and-accidents/airforce/RNLAF/1/

    Poor pilots? Please….

    in reply to: F-4M FGR Mk.2 versus EE F.6 Lightning #2466641
    Peter G
    Participant

    The majority of RAF Phantom were roled as attack in 1971.

    Phantom FG.1 were the major exception, they were pure air to air fighters.
    No 43 Sqn at Leuchars

    Phantom FGR.2
    No II Sqn at Laarbruch (Recon)
    No 6, 54 Sqn at Conningsby (overseas reinforcement role)
    No 14, No 17, No 31 at Bruggen (nuclear strike role with US Mk43/57)

    The nuclear role went 1975, and they were tasked as pure air to air fighters in 1976 in RAFG and back in UK.

    Its no wonder they ‘lacked’ air to air skills….

    in reply to: Weapon Load Question: F-14, MiG-27, al. #2480689
    Peter G
    Participant

    Under intakes

    in reply to: International Air Power Review (IAPR) dead? #2492399
    Peter G
    Participant

    Yes – its on the Egyptian airbase.

    Got my issue today!

    in reply to: International Air Power Review (IAPR) dead? #2456463
    Peter G
    Participant

    I’ve also be charged yesterday – trouble is I was for Volume 24 and have still to receive that!

    Also no reply to two emails…..

    Peter G
    Participant

    Excellent!

    I ordered this one last week – mainly for the Tu-128 info.

    in reply to: F-15 pilot opinion about the SU-30 MKI at Red Flag #2495183
    Peter G
    Participant

    Maybe the Su-30MKI has the FOD screens removed? Anyone have decent photos inside the air intakes – on the ground?

    in reply to: Small Air Forces Thread #11 #2459341
    Peter G
    Participant

    does anyone has any picture about E-2C Hawkeye and Chinoock of the United Arab Emirates Air Force ?

    UAE doesn’t have any AEW aircraft at present, although the E-2C is proposed along with Boeing 737AEW&C, Eireye (EMB-145 or Saab 2000) and possibly E-2D (if its cleared for export) with ‘wet’ replacing the flolding wings.

    in reply to: MiG-25R Photo Foxbats #2471206
    Peter G
    Participant

    Yep, this weekend I am reading an article about Russian nuclear bombs stationed in East Germany during the Cold War. A former russian pilot is metioned, who reported that the Mig-25RB’s stationed a Werneuchen (GDR) and Brzeg (Poland) carried nuclear bombs in their second role. This role was top secret, so pilots trained high speed, high flights (20km) in Belorussia.

    The article “Atombomben in der DDR” is published in the German magazine “Fliegerrevue extra #22”. 😎
    Here the link in German: http://www.fliegerrevue.de/fr_extra.asp?PG=173&AID=21019

    You da man! I’ll order this one tonight. Might have some problems translating it myself, but oh well….

    Does it mention the nuclear bomb the MiG-25RB carried? Name, yield, weight?

Viewing 15 posts - 556 through 570 (of 803 total)