Key Publishing

kiwi_dave

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)

1 2 →

Author

Posts
April 8, 2013 at 5:17 am in reply to: Uruguayan Navy Vikings…….. #2285807

kiwi_dave
Participant

I wonder what the comparative operating costs of a Viking versus say a Challenger 604/ 605MRA (the Danes use them for maritime patrol). They use very similar engines but I’m thinking that the Viking would cost more to operate per hour than the Challenger. Shame as the Viking is one of my all time favourite aircraft.

April 17, 2012 at 5:08 am in reply to: Second Dash 8 for UAE Air Force through SNN #2327153

kiwi_dave
Participant

It certainly looks a purposeful aircraft. Lots of lumps, bumps, fairing and antenna.
Anyone able to identify some of the less obvious ones – I am thinking the radome after of the belly radar and those around the tail?

I think this is the first time I’ve seen a MPA with old school searchlights. I wonder why decided to go for this bearing in mind the EO turret under the nose. I think its a clever way of reducing drag using the transparent fairings under the wings though. I wonder if we’ll see more searchlights on MPA Coast Guard planes in the future.

March 20, 2012 at 11:48 pm in reply to: 'New' RAF BAe-146 #2344770

kiwi_dave
Participant

Interesting to note the patches on the aft fuselage and under the forward fuselage for the DIRCM a la the Queens Flight examples.

June 9, 2011 at 3:18 am in reply to: Bears low level in The north Sea today #2316904

kiwi_dave
Participant

How typical is a low(ish) level mission profile for a Bear. I know the contemporary Buff has a low-level ability but wasn’t sure if this was shared by the Bear. Anyone got any reliable performance figures for a Bear on the deck? The Buff is normally quoted as around 365knots or 0.53Mach so how does this compare?

May 9, 2011 at 12:17 am in reply to: Boeing E-4: Unexpected in Afghanistan #2347911

kiwi_dave
Participant

I read somewhere that the E-4 will retire staring 2015. Any ideas what’s going to replace them? Perhaps a common platform again with the new Airfore One i.e. 747-8?

February 8, 2011 at 7:31 pm in reply to: Asia's A-400 beater flies, 2nd prototype. Beats Embraers KC-390 too #2349617

kiwi_dave
Participant

In many ways the C-2 would fill the gap for outsized commercial cargo that was filled by the old Belfast ex-UK strategic freighter when there was more than one in operation. A good option for people needing to move outsized cargo that will not fit in a cargo version of a DC-10/ 747 etc… or commercial C-130/ Il-76, but who don’t want to pay for the cost of an entire An-124 for say 70,000Ibs of cargo.
By all accounts, the Belfasts were in demand for their unique capabilities.

February 3, 2011 at 7:29 pm in reply to: Asia's A-400 beater flies, 2nd prototype. Beats Embraers KC-390 too #2351603

kiwi_dave
Participant

I read somewhere that despite the C-17’s much vaunted and expensive rough field capability, the US uses it rarely due to the potential for damage to the aircraft. Not only FOD but also the impact of stones and rocks on the airframe. Hard tactical landings also tend to severely reduce airframe life and increase maintenance demands.
Perhaps the only FOD-proof turbofan airlifter currently in service is the AN-74 Coaler series that use the YC-14 inspired over-wing engine mounting and the Coander effect to enhance lift.
Perhaps with some modification to the undercarriage, the C-2 could have better soft-field performance – lower load factors. However with the low-slung engines it is never going to be flying into a remote dirt airfield in some war zone to resupply troops. That said, it would be unlikely that a C-17 would being doing that either and more likely that it would be a C-130 or better an A-400.
If you want a big tactical go anywhere airlifter – get a Grizzly, if you want a strategic airlifter for moving cargo from home base to the warzone or disaster area – get a C-2 and if you want to move LOTS of cargo get a SuperGalaxy.

January 27, 2011 at 10:55 pm in reply to: Asia's A-400 beater flies, 2nd prototype. Beats Embraers KC-390 too #2354729

kiwi_dave
Participant

From some angles the wing box produces a prominent hump which suggests that it doesn’t in fact cut into the cargo volume too much.

January 27, 2011 at 10:54 pm in reply to: Asia's A-400 beater flies, 2nd prototype. Beats Embraers KC-390 too #2354746

kiwi_dave
Participant

I think it has similar payload performance to the A400 but is faster and has better range. The baby C-17 notion is pretty apt except for the probable lack of tactical airfield performance. I think it may be pitched as a commercial mini-C17 similar to the BC17 concept a few years back. It would be an efficient air-lifter for any airforce that doesn’t require delivery of loads directly into tactical strips.

January 27, 2011 at 10:51 pm in reply to: Asia's A-400 beater flies, 2nd prototype. Beats Embraers KC-390 too #2354749

kiwi_dave
Participant

agreed, they do look awfully close to the ground. FOD would be real concern in all but the most well maintained airports. Forget trying to land it on a semi-prepared strip a la C17 or A400 Grizzly. That said, the specs I have seen suggested that it has pretty good short field performance (important for getting into the island airfields in the Japanese area of interest I suppose).

January 19, 2010 at 12:45 am in reply to: CH-46 'phrog' updates #2415131

kiwi_dave
Participant

how about new engines – RTM322’s or Makilas, a glass cockpit and BERP or Carson blades and a remanufacturing similar to the CH-47D to F process.

Behold the Phrog-NG!

January 19, 2010 at 12:43 am in reply to: CH-46 'phrog' updates #2415138

kiwi_dave
Participant

Agreed – there’s something evocative about the good old phrog that the new fangled tilt rotors don’t seem to have. Perhaps we’ll be saying that about the Osprey when it’s time for it to be retired.

As far as I know the medium-lift requirement has been scrapped. The RAF is giving its Merlins to the Marines to replace the Sea King HC.4’s and will then operate more Chinooks. Not sure if this is a necessarily good thing as the Chinook seem far too large for many tasks. Probably more of a short term financially decision driven by the Treasury rather than a considered militarily sound decision.

The CH-46’s could make good logging and firefighting helos – a la Tarhe/ Sky Cranes before them. The Sea King (roughly the same performance metrics) is still in wide demand in these fields – Carlson is making a tidy profit from supporting and upgrading ex-military and civilian S-61s.

June 1, 2009 at 2:14 am in reply to: Helicopter Engine IR Suppression Systems #2475127

kiwi_dave
Participant

The changes on the UH-1Y and AH-1Z are interesting. They were also done because the hot exhausts weakened the tail structure.

I understand that there was similar issue with the OH-58D when it entered service – the engine exhaust plume tended to cook the ‘-144’ jammer which seems a little ironic. Not sure its accurate though.

April 21, 2009 at 1:46 am in reply to: European made onboard, fixed wing AEW. #2037034

kiwi_dave
Participant

By rumours Thales bought at least half the remaining units as they still had 100,000+ flight hours left in their frames – for possible resale as modernized dedicated AShM carriers.

Talking of retired designs – what about the S-3? There was an AEW variant considered as an E-2 replacement. I think it had a triangular dorsal radar array? There was also a dedicated tanker & COD version as well, so you could have a single airframe for three functions. The should be plenty of airframe life left in them as the USN retired them as a cost cutting exercise?

Would love to see the Alize back though – modern avionics, new engine and you have a great aircraft.

January 20, 2008 at 12:53 am in reply to: Transall C-160 variant information #2513889

kiwi_dave
Participant

Dave,

I attached a pic of the C-160ASF model here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,675.15.html

look at Reply#28

Regards

Antonio

Many thanks for that. I don’t seem to be able to locate the picture though. It is not in the thread itself and the link to Secret Projects requires me to log-in. Tried doing a search of SP without logging in and it came up blank. Probably me being really stupid but could you post the actual picture in this thread? 😮

Cheers

Dave
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)

1 2 →