Page 138 – Key Publishing

Wanshan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,056 through 2,070 (of 3,544 total)

← 1 2 3 … 137 138 139 … 235 236 237 →

Author

Posts
November 19, 2008 at 11:18 pm in reply to: Mystery Frigate drawing on Converteam Webpage #2059752

Wanshan
Participant

Actually, the link Wanshan posted is the incorrect link… here is the link to where that drawing is on Richard’s site… and it does credit MihoshiK (drawing & credit 2/3 down the page).

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/mvd.htm

Oops! Corrected it. Though CNGF was where I first started.

November 19, 2008 at 11:04 pm in reply to: Revamp-a-Haruna #2059769

Wanshan
Participant

I cant off the top of my head think of another frigate design that could embark two Sea King class helicopters.

Definitely the 3.850 tons fl Godavari and later Brahmaputra classes. Possibly the 5400 ton German F-123

November 19, 2008 at 10:58 pm in reply to: Vikramaditya Part 2 #2059773

Wanshan
Participant

China already have two or three Kiev class carriers sitting around as amusement parks, for the price of the ex-Gorshkov they’d either refit those, refit Varyag or build their own from scratch.

2 (Kiev and Minsk). IIRC Varyag has no propulsion plant installed.

November 18, 2008 at 5:41 pm in reply to: Revamp-a-Haruna #2060431

Wanshan
Participant

Since you can already fit two Sea King sized helicopter into the hangar of a conventionally sized frigate, and with modern helicopter haul down gear you can employ a flight deck of normal proportions, what is the point of a dedicated DDH?

I really don’t see the value in going to such great lengths to add another landing spot and a 3rd helicopter.

What other landing spot?

November 17, 2008 at 8:40 pm in reply to: Mystery Frigate drawing on Converteam Webpage #2060708

Wanshan
Participant

I corrected the aspect ratio and increased the size, and it appears that this drawing does not represent any know frigate proposal.

Any clue what it represents?

Appearance is similar (not identical) to middle ship in row below, which is a land-atack version of Type 45.

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/mvd.htm< corrected 20 nov 08

November 17, 2008 at 8:10 pm in reply to: Revamp-a-Haruna #2060720

Wanshan
Participant

Right here

November 17, 2008 at 7:37 pm in reply to: Unusual Sidewinder mountings… #2487143

Wanshan
Participant

Does anybody know of any propellor driven aircraft that carried Sidewinder?

Tucano p’raps?

Embrear SuperTuc

Beechcraft AT-6B

November 17, 2008 at 7:11 pm in reply to: Unusual Sidewinder mountings… #2487173

Wanshan
Participant

Sorry I don’t have a picture, but the F-8 Crusader (and later A-7 Corsair 2) had mountings for single sidewinders on the side of the fuselage. Sometimes the F-8 had a pair of them on each side as well.

dave

Crusader

http://www.chinalakealumni.org/1963.htm
http://www.chinalakealumni.org/1962.htm
http://www.chinalakealumni.org/1961.htm

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/gZ0ItqUZSolVZ1-dtoaLeA

Corsair II

http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-JSF-Thud-2004.html

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/vR1evNr1PI8Yypu8GKQiNQ

November 17, 2008 at 12:33 am in reply to: Revamp-a-Haruna #2060939

Wanshan
Participant

Frankly that is a stupid question, there is no such thing as ‘todays environment’, that is determined by the operational requirements of individual navies. If you want this thread to work you need to provide us with a navy first.

But frankly the specific question you are asking has already been answered by the Absalon and the F125.

Seems this thread is working pretty well: lots of interesting responses. Some of which are much more informative than stating -without any elaboration – that my question – whatever you take it to be – is somhow answered by Absalon and F125.

I apologize for my ignorance and yield to your magnificence :dev2:

(please tone down that uncalled-for condescending tone that no one here is waiting for)

November 16, 2008 at 10:01 am in reply to: Revamp-a-Haruna #2061176

Wanshan
Participant

The above is an Absalon/F125 type affair not a dedicated ASW/Sea control platform.

That is part of the question: the JMSDF ships were designed for that role but how suitable are they in todays environment? Is there still a need for such a dedicated ASW/Sea control platform? Or are there perhaps other roles that such a design could be eminently suitable for? E.g. more oriented toward littoral ops with a combination of armed heli’s (not necessarily primarily ASW platforms) and UAVs like the MQ-8B Fire Scout and with Italian Otomelara guns 2x 127/54 LW gun systems with Vulcano (arty) forward and 2x 76mm SR with Strales/Davide (CIWS) port/starboard on the flank/rear. Coupled to a VLS, which rather than e.g. SAM/ASROC could fit SAM/LAM. Or perhaps a navalised MLRS (e.g. IMI’s 45 km LAR-160 / 90 km MAR-350 or US MLRS/ATACMS or Avibras Astros.

Generally, form follows function. However, in this case there is a given form and there is the question of what functions it can (best or alternatively) perform.

November 15, 2008 at 10:18 am in reply to: Navy News from Around the World II #2061345

Wanshan
Participant

New Missile Frigate at Huangpu Shipyard

A new missile frigate has been identified under construction at the Huangpu Shipyard in Guangzhou, Guangdong Province. The vessel is thought to be a follow-up of the Type 054A (Jiangkai-II class) and may be designated Type 054B (Jiangkai-III class?). The vessel, currently in the dockyard of the Huangpu Shipyard, is expected to be completed in late 2009. At the moment it is not known how the new vessel differs to previous designs of the same class, but some improvements in sensor and possibly weapon system are expected.

http://www.sinodefence.com/weapons/report/showimage.asp?imagename=080921a_1large

http://www.sinodefence.com/weapons/report/showimage.asp?imagename=080921a_2large

http://www.sinodefence.com/weapons/report/080921a.asp

Is it possible that this ship, rather than being a ‘further development’ 054B, simply is a ship that started to be built as a 054 but that was finished as a 054A (the hull shows characteristics of the former, the superstructure and armament appear more similar to the latter)?

November 14, 2008 at 4:47 pm in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2061441

Wanshan
Participant

Army robbery: How The Admiral Gorshkov was sold
High-rank officials in defense establishment realize that it is not capable of making modern weapons, but they just can’t refuse to accept megabuck contracts and budget pumping.

http://en.novayagazeta.ru/data/2007/59/01.html

OLD TRICKS>>>

Feb. 19, 2008
Home Aircraft Carrier May Go to Russian Navy
The aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov will be delivered to the Russian Navy instead of going to India after modernization. A source within the Russian military-industrial complex told RBK that Russia and India are now reaching an agreement on changing the conditions of the 2004 contract for the ship’s overhaul. Under that contract, India received the hull without charge on condition that it be modernized at Sevmashpredpriyatie. The value of that contract was $1.5 billion.
According to unofficial information, negotiations are currently underway to expand the value of the contract by about $1 billion. “That question is being worked out. If a compromise is not found with India, the aircraft carrier will probably be purchased by the Russian Navy,” the source said.

The Admiral Gorshkov was built in 1978 as the Baku. Its name was changed in 1991. It will be equipped with Russian-Indian Bramos missiles and Russian or Israeli air defense systems after modernization.

http://www.kommersant.com/p-12082/military-technical_cooperation/

November 14, 2008 at 12:08 am in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2061583

Wanshan
Participant

Correct for depreciation :diablo: ?

November 10, 2008 at 11:15 pm in reply to: STOL on aircraft carrier (LHD) #2062119

Wanshan
Participant

Could anyone on the forum provide more information about the mid life upgrade of the Bronco, and in particular, what type of missions were they used for by the USN.

OV-10 crews performed many of the same missions that it refined during Vietnam… controlling airstrikes by AV-8Bs and A-6s, controlling Naval artillery, and relaying reports from Navy SEALS and other recon units.
http://www.ov-10bronco.net/index_desert_storm_10th_anniversary.cfm

The last series model, the OV-10D, saw action in the Persian Gulf War. This particular system was modernized to some extent with FLIR, video and laser designators. Among other improvements that included better engine performance and a more powerful 20mm three barrel cannon
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=147
http://www.ov-10bronco.net/technical.cfm

Jane’s Defence Weekly
April 12, 2006
By Joshua Kucera, JDW Staff Reporter, Washington, DC

The US Marine Corps is looking at the possibility of reviving the retired OV-10 Bronco observation aircraft for use in Iraq, according to a top service official. The aircraft, which was retired from US service in 1994, would be used to augment surveillance of roads in Iraq.
http://www.popasmoke.com/notam2/showthread.php?t=5563

November 6, 2008 at 7:13 pm in reply to: Rebuild-a-Slava #2062719

Wanshan
Participant

How about 3 variants:
– AAW
– General Purpose/ASuW
– Land attack
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 2,056 through 2,070 (of 3,544 total)

← 1 2 3 … 137 138 139 … 235 236 237 →