dark light

seahawk

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,926 through 2,940 (of 3,269 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: JSF news #2673056
    seahawk
    Participant

    That is is it exactly. At the moment all customers are development partners, so why keep them out from some technology stuff. If you donยดt trsut them enough, then do not accept them as partners. Those partners are all long term allies.

    I would accept those measures for exports planes, but for partner nations ??

    Norway should really decide to go EF and take the 5% workshare it was offered. Would be much better for techtransfer.

    If that is the new way for all US weapons, then I would not buy from them anymore.

    in reply to: JSF news #2673099
    seahawk
    Participant

    But having an US or Lockheed offical to unlock certain areas of the aircraft is more then protecting their intellectual property, that is stupid. It is like buying a car and you canยดt open the engine bay.

    I would not want the jet with this features even I would get it for free.

    I mean either you do not sell the plane to countries you donยดt trust or you add such stuff. But being the UK or the NEtherlands or Norway it would **** me off if I would get an US controlled plane. That plane takes you from alley to lackey. If the US does not even trust the developing partners, then why let them join in the first place and how should they help in the development and construction if you keep them out of the sensitve areas.

    A SU or Rafale looks so much better to me under that circumstances.

    in reply to: what is your dream air force? #2673717
    seahawk
    Participant

    Well something small seems to be the airforce of choice.

    – say 36 Tranche 3 EFs with Meteor and active array radar
    – 6 CASA CM-295 for transport
    – some Grobs for basic training
    – PC-9 for basic and advanced training
    – 36 NH-90 for troop transport and CSAR
    – 18 Eurocopter Tiger EAD for close support
    – 3 A310 MRTTs for transport and tanking

    – if I need a maritime capability I would add 4 CM-295 sea patrol aircraft

    – some S-300 and SA-15 for airdefence
    – perhaps some Tunguska to spice up my close in defences
    – Mistrals manportable SAMs

    in reply to: Military Aircraft #2673824
    seahawk
    Participant

    http://www.seahawkgfx.de

    Use any pics you like ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: JSF news #2673828
    seahawk
    Participant

    Now that is a deal, you can pay millions of $ to participate in the development, but you need an US or Lockheed offical to open the more sensitive panels on the aircraft.

    So you get an aircraft, that is not yours really and are allowed to print the pilots manual in your language for paying the money – great deal. ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: JSF news #2673888
    seahawk
    Participant

    This Corchief (Corsair + Thunderchief) pos will be getting more expenisve during the development. I always wondered how all those states participating are supposed to get a workshare, and it still being an US product, which means the majority off the work is done by US firms.
    I bet that most nations will have wasted their investment into that plane. It will grow fat and will become more expensive.

    Perhaps buying european would be a better idea …

    in reply to: F-15C/D USAF's Replacement Plans #2673964
    seahawk
    Participant

    Yep, I would rather buy some more F-16s as replacements until enough Raptors are ready. Most F-15C are tired, cause they have seen a lot of stress in their lifetime. New F-15s ist out of the question for the รšSAF imo, a F-15F or something would not be much cheaper then an F-22. once F-22 production is in full swing.

    And I would bet money on the fact that F-22 production will not end with 250 aircraft.

    in reply to: Best bang for your money! #2674536
    seahawk
    Participant

    Well, I would say MiG-29 SMT. The aircraft is up-to-date, you can integrate western and russian weapons. And it is cheap. The remanufactured aircrafts are zero houred, so they are actually new builts.

    Life-cycle costs could be higher, then for the F-16 though, but if you have a good aircraft industry and can make the overhauls yourself, that money is spent on your economy. But that also means you should be buy a decent number, so that the money for the overhaul facillities is not wasted.

    FC-1 is still to untested, to decide about it.

    in reply to: Air farce one #2675199
    seahawk
    Participant

    Apart from some factual faults, like squadron service in 2006, this article points to some very true problems, namely the difficult multination programm managing.

    So many different wishes, needs and all to be fullfilled by one aircraft.

    How it compares to Rafale is open to debate, but both are inferior to F-22.

    in reply to: Feb16-2004: its official Su30K -vs- F15C #2675203
    seahawk
    Participant

    This time I would bet on a clear SU-30 victory and that the results will leak.

    Is there a better way to justify the F-22 ?? ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: Stealth design detection #2676187
    seahawk
    Participant

    Originally posted by SerbPVO
    Serbia shot down a couple of “invisibles” (sorry, we didn’t know they were invisible;) during the Kosovo War…

    btw, anybody hear of a Czech anti-stealth radar, called Tamara?

    Well either the US quickly built more F-117 or that is simply wrong. AFAIK all F-117 serials have been seen again after the war.

    in reply to: 210 more Super bugs for the USN #2676193
    seahawk
    Participant

    Originally posted by KC-135Boomer
    WTF?? I recall a day that we went just north of Baghdad to rescue a pair of F-18c’s because their great Super Hornet tanker version broke down and had to RTB…

    Besides we are defended, we have a sexton port and eggs ๐Ÿ˜€

    Well ok, but the SH is just a bit faster, (say 2 knotes when carrying all those tanks) ๐Ÿ˜€

    Now if you could carry Winders, … ok just say it can land on a carrier.

    in reply to: General Discussion #423964
    seahawk
    Participant

    He is still ill from an accidential visit to Burger King ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: Hey where's Mr. Hamburger? #1991528
    seahawk
    Participant

    He is still ill from an accidential visit to Burger King ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: Stealth design detection #2677350
    seahawk
    Participant

    Actually this a standard operating procedure. As soon as they are out of the threat enevelope they make themselves visible.

    It is hard to be tracked by the air controllers if you are stealthy.

Viewing 15 posts - 2,926 through 2,940 (of 3,269 total)