dark light

seahawk

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,891 through 1,905 (of 3,269 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Astreaus New B757 #638829
    seahawk
    Participant

    Nice design Sandy. Could you do a modernised Condor livery on a 757 keeping the yellow color ??

    in reply to: Martinair unveils new livery 17/10/04! #578071
    seahawk
    Participant

    quite ok

    in reply to: Martinair unveils new livery 17/10/04! #638844
    seahawk
    Participant

    quite ok

    in reply to: Whats wrong with EF2000? #2676680
    seahawk
    Participant

    How does the EF have a better radar? The RBE can hold its own against the Captor in terms of tech, being a PESA. Besides, both are going the AESA route anyhow.
    The Rafale overall appears a more LO design than the EF- clean config. Thats a plus. The Spectra also appears niftier than the gear on the EF..

    Well I have heard very different thing. Captor i the last of a long line of convetional systems, but all I heard points that it is perfroming excellent.
    RBE seems to be medicore.

    On the LO thing. There are different ways to do LO, look at a F-117 and a B-2, they look different but they both work. Now think about EF and Rafale.

    in reply to: Does any country need the MiG-31's capabilities? #2676689
    seahawk
    Participant

    the kind of hi-alt missile firing perch against cruise missiles or bombers is better done in future by UCAVs. No form of complicated ACM is expected, just be a stealth platform loitering for 12-24 hrs at 100,000ft armed with a good network and radar capability. when the network detects hostile missiles, the nearest node fires off a couple missiles and goes passive again.

    should be cheaper & capable than a fleet of Mig-31s if done right.

    That is the future, MiG-31 is the past.

    in reply to: Russian attack capabilities #2053339
    seahawk
    Participant

    hmm, and how far are your J-7s going to fly? If that carrier is smart, it waits for another two carriers to arrive, then with their combined force, they can stay well out of the range of your J-7s and send their Air Group to slaughter the planes first. Like you said, pave the way for the carrier to get close enough for land-attack ops.

    And how long is your even more detectable surface action group gonna last against 12 Sqn of F-18s armed with HARM and Harpoons.

    Say 24 for air to air support.
    12 carrying 4 HARMS each
    That leaves around 108 planes with at least 2 Harpoons.

    On the otherhand the J-7 won´t be good for any meaningfull blue water ops, but neither would a SuAG without air cover last long against a carrier group.
    However the some of the J-7 would survive long enough to come in when the Marines and their landing ships show up, and then hey are dangerous.

    Do you believe that any of the Shipwreck carriers would be left ??

    All ina ll I still believe that the best way to sink a carrier is another carrier and nothing else.

    in reply to: Air Europa & Binter – both going Airbus? #582709
    seahawk
    Participant

    They are surely more fragile, then the ATRs, but having seen Binter fly they should probably use AN-32s or something.

    in reply to: Air Europa & Binter – both going Airbus? #641321
    seahawk
    Participant

    They are surely more fragile, then the ATRs, but having seen Binter fly they should probably use AN-32s or something.

    in reply to: Cold Heathrow… #582723
    seahawk
    Participant

    fantastic pics

    in reply to: Cold Heathrow… #641340
    seahawk
    Participant

    fantastic pics

    in reply to: Russian attack capabilities #2053400
    seahawk
    Participant

    BTW, Dionis, no, only one Udaloy was built as ASuW ship, not converted. It had a complete new weapons suite, including two Kashtans instead of the AK-630s, Moskit instead of Rastrub, AK-130 instead of the two single 100mm turrets. This unit however is still classed as a ASW vessel, because of its good sonar suite and helo and torpedo capabilities. The other units are all still in their original role.

    Seahawk,
    A Harpoon would not kill a carrier, I’m almost sure it would not even disturb air ops that much. Yes a hit would be a good PR case, but a kill would be much better. And coming close enough with your NSM to shoot at a carrier… Well I don’t think that will be a good way.
    I think your carrier group will be VERY busy if you want to clear that ASuW task force out of the way, including all those Oscars (of which you don’t know how many there are around you, let alone WHERE they are, except for the ones starting their launch(and then it’s too late), or found by luck).
    I don’t think it’s easy to take out the Kirov and Kuznetsov with its escorts at all… And I’m sure Jonesy will even agree on that!

    And who can afford a SuAG with a large battlecruiser, ASuW ships, AA defense ships, Oscars and some Akulas or something for escort ??

    Imagine how many J-7 carrying 2 NSMs one could buy for that money. And I wonder how a carrier battle group would try to avoid 400-500 J-7s with 2 ASMs coming in.

    Apart from the fact, that only 3 countries in the world could or can afford such a naval force.

    in reply to: Hamas making new anti-aircraft missile #2053421
    seahawk
    Participant

    Looks like an ATGM to me

    in reply to: Russian attack capabilities #2053425
    seahawk
    Participant

    hmm ASW screen is mostly provided by the Udaloys, also,the Kirovs themselves have a VDS and bowmounted sonar and of course three helicopters of which two are dedicated ASW helos. It’s ten torpedo tubes also allow it to use SS-N-15 and SS-N-16 anti-sub rocket-torpedoes and of course regular 533mm torps.

    You know that having 2 such taskforces is more then 90% of the world navies could ever afford and do operate ??

    For me the most advanced SSM is the missile that can do the job, be it a frigate, corvette or carrier. A Harpoon or NSM can’t simply sink a carrier, P-700 might. Of course in my definition, the price and difficulty of the system isn’t taken in account. But I suppose that’s a matter of comprehension, what is “most advanced”? according to you it’s something different and I can of course live with that.

    And what is good for ?? If you sink a carrier or damage it enough to force it to withdraw makes no difference. Any missile hit an an american carrier would be a huge PR victory, you don´t need to sink it. And a carrier won´t come close until the captian is sure enough to have cleared away the biggest threat to the task force. A SuAG or a sqn of Granit carrying planes is relative easy to clear away. NSms hanging from the tactical fighters, corvettes, frigates and even helicopters are much harder to take out of the game and therefore have a much better chance to get a shot at the carrier.

    let’s make it clear: If let’s say N.K. or Iran let’s say buy SSN 19 ( that you so much dislike forgetting that they were already 20 years ago while this s..t of NSM is only coming now and this for me IT’S a difference) this NOT MEAN that they must buy a Kirov or Oscar. In this case you should be right 100%, but not forget how a single vessel in the history has made a strong deterrent ( the Yavuz, the Tirpiz).

    And those ships usually took away more resources, then they were worth operationally.

    So, what’s the strange to imagine a SSN 19 coastal version for Iran or N.K. or China?

    There weapons could be “vulnerable?” Laughing for xx minuts. Have you present the “success” of the SCud hunting in DS and OIF? Do you find that a truck with a single SSN 19 is more vulnerable that a truck with 2 exocet but that it must be in the 20-30 Km range from the shores? Have you have present the “little difficults” to fly deep in Iran for 400 km before to reach some SSN 19 mobile launchers?
    Have you present that the SSN 19 could be used as nuclear attack supersonic long range missile in a manner that NO norwegian s….y missiles can eventually do?

    Even land based you are still looking at the targeting problem. If land based systems can triangulate the postion of a carrier strike group exactly enough, you are most liekly well within the range of NSM.
    Secondly I bet that having missile silos all around your cost is no option if you have longer coatline to defend. So you would look at mobile systems. Grnait is huge and unlike a SCUD it has to move towards the target before eganging. Given the needed trailer size I bet it would be a nice target on a JSTARS. It could be possible, but I would prefer more, smaller missiles.

    in reply to: Ghana Airways Status #582946
    seahawk
    Participant

    I heard that Hamburg International will take over the service to DUS, btu we have heard a lot.

    in reply to: Ghana Airways Status #641484
    seahawk
    Participant

    I heard that Hamburg International will take over the service to DUS, btu we have heard a lot.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,891 through 1,905 (of 3,269 total)