dark light

Stan hyd

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 466 through 480 (of 563 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: AAfter RAFALE deal, Brazil need a new Carrier ? #2023456
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    The USA is the only country currently building steam catapults, but others could also build them. 1950s British technology is within the reach of many countries. It would take longer, & might cost more, though.

    Electro-magnetic catapults are another matter. While the underlying technology is widespread, with firms in several countries building linear motors which propel larger objects than EMALS needs to, or propelling objects faster, the combination of speed, size, shielding, etc. needed to make EMALS work is tricky, & so far only the USA has put in any serious effort to overcome the engineering problems involved.

    As you say EMALS are a massive investment and I believe that only nations with fantastic relations with the US would get this tech to share. France and UK are the only ones likely to need it.

    Steam, im sure would be where the Brazilians went for with their experience, and I’m sure they will have them off an old US carrier or produced new. Or they may just go for a ramp.

    in reply to: AAfter RAFALE deal, Brazil need a new Carrier ? #2023540
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    – Too costly, hmmm, in fact a conventionnal aircraft carrier design were on the extreme limit (or lightly over) of the brazilian budget…..

    – A possible commercial standard vessel from the koreans ???:confused: You speak about the Korean Dohkdo design ???
    http://www.military-today.com/navy/dokdo_class.jpg
    I doubt seriously that brazil buy this type of vessel (better for use of F35, don’t able to take RAFALE)

    Read what I wrote, I said something along the lines of this picture

    http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvfimagesbig/cvf02.jpg

    and built in South Korea, they have some of the best ship building yards in the world and are more than capable of producing something along the lines of this. Also i would install cats and as I said the USA would probably be more than happy to supply these.

    in reply to: AAfter RAFALE deal, Brazil need a new Carrier ? #2023674
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    My mistake, thanks for the correction. I still maintain though that the CVF would be a step too far in terms of costs. Commercial standards would be fine for Brazils future carrier.

    in reply to: AAfter RAFALE deal, Brazil need a new Carrier ? #2023702
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    Brazil would find it difficult I believe to buy a CVF, too costly. Remember they have only bought 36 jets for their Air Force. Thats a small purchase for a country the size of Brazil.

    If we were coming in off the back of a 60-100 jet purchase I would say yes, they are prepared to spend the funds and get serious about defence, but they didnt.

    If they were to buy a replacement for the Sao Paulo I would say they should be looking for a commericial standard vessel produced by the Koreans.

    This was an early design for the CVF that could work. I’m sure the US would sell them new sets of steam catapults to put to use. Not likely to get the new rail launch system though.

    http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvfimagesbig/cvf02.jpg

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2023804
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    I think they already have a measured section ready to slot in- I also believe we might see the bridge deck come out too.

    Would be pretty interesting to see them slot a pre fab unit on the top of this with all the radar stuff ready to rock.

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2024347
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    Sorry Grim didnt make my point very well.

    I meant to say that after our experiences with the SA80 mk 1 we should be looking at possibly buying off the shelf, something like the HK416 would be perfect.

    Also alot of people look at the C3 and can pick out a number of foreign designs already out there that could fill the role really well and could be produced by BVT quickly.

    Grim what do you think to the latest fleet designs? and when are you gonna give it a stab?

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2024356
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    Its the same over and over again. I know its great to support british industry, but value to the tax payers and the MOD is a massive issue. If the British Firms cant beat Spanish firms in terms of cost then thats their loss!

    The UK should be buying of the shelf more often then not in this day and age.

    The next Rifle for the Army is a case in point ! Hell so is the C3

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2024439
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    OK one more look at this.

    This is my new look Royal Navy Fleet.

    Type 45

    http://www.shipbucket.com/Real%20Designs/Great%20Britain/GB%20DDG%20Type%2045%20DARING%201.gif

    C1 – Scalp and CAMM + Quad Harpoon + 155mm
    (Type 45 Hull)

    http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/8136/revengec1k.png

    C2 – CAMM + Quad Harpoon + 155mm

    http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2380/victoriac2.png

    C3 – 76 mm

    http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/4223/shetland2c3.png

    I’m liking the Type 45 Hull for C1 now – lots of space!

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2025015
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    ok so they’ve removed some of the island,

    http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/7984/varyagaug27.jpg

    compared too

    http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/3042/varyagjuly30.jpg

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -II #2025192
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    Russia set to purchase large French warship – top brass

    The admiral said at the time that the Russian Navy was interested in “joint research and also direct purchases of French naval equipment.”

    http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20090826/155931865.html

    I will be interested to see if they do progress on to talking about Carrier and to see what they come up with.

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2025217
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    ok only slight changes. LIked the idea of more room for troops e.t.c on the C2.

    Lets see what you think.

    http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/908/fcsl.png

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2025233
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    Good points Grim.

    I accept those on the C1/Type 45.

    Tonight I shall sit down for a drawing session. Lets see what I can come up with 🙂

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2025251
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    The only thing i would say against TLAM is that it is an old design but it’s still getting updated as time goes on. Plus it’s cheap and has a longer range IIRC than Scalp Naval.

    The Type 45 will get Harpoon at some point maybe once they round off all the testing etc. They will most likely be nicked off another vessel in the fleet when they retire.

    The thing is the Type 42’s dont run with Harpoons and if they steal them from the Type23/22 I will murder some one. We need a new buy to kit them out right.

    I can understand them taking the phalanx from the type 42, no point in buying new ones but the Harpoon is a must have for the type 45. Leaving a ship like this without an anti surface missile is stupid.

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2025257
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    Your right, I talk about Naval Scalp as i like the fact that this is produced in europe. We do already use tomahawks though and if I could use them with the A-70 as per their broshure I probably would fit them instead.

    With regards to the Absalon class, there is a reason that My C1 and C2 designs share the same hull. It makes it cheaper and quicker. Some people say use the Type 45 and then have anew hull for the C2. I say design a hull for the C1 and C2 there will be alot more of them than the type 45. Although that said using the Type 45 hull for both coule be an option. Maybe a little too big though.

    I will be sending some letters out again with regards to something i just re read on the wiki site for type 45. I want the *******s to get the harpoons fitted to the Type 45- Its a disgrace that they arent.

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2025263
    Stan hyd
    Participant

    In this instance I revert to this stance.

    If its good enough to be used on the Yank ships its good enough for us to use.

Viewing 15 posts - 466 through 480 (of 563 total)