Bager1968I agree with your general point but …JUST to counterbalance the deck extension to port?
Since they had to add the weight, why not add it in a useful form?
That is a great place to stage equipment, fuel tanks, & weapons… as well as for personnel to move without being in the way of aircraft.
Bager1968So they were made as training for machinists… very interesting.
Bager1968Yes, the deck is fairly spacious…
I think if not for the problem/headache of re-routing the exhaust, they would have shifted the Island to the deck edge. After all that whole island was installed as a separate module during its construction.Also note the area next to the island. Its not covered with anti-skid layer. So no chance for the speculated aircraft basing there.
There is no possibility of moving the island even one foot.
That is a lot of weight, and the loading balance of the entire ship is designed around the island being in that exact place, and within a certain weight range.
They had to add the deck extension outboard of the island to counter-balance the weight of the extension of the angle deck to port that provided space for the arresting gear.
Bager1968I had a look around a turbine powered version of one of these at MAN a few years ago, They are, er…….”Special looking” as my mum said about me once!
Rgds Cking
Found this link on another forum, they’ve got the wrong engines but the flying looks pretty interesting.
Saw a couple of Hellenic Air Force CL-415s at Preveza last month,
Precisely… the CL-415 is the turboprop update of the CL-215 design.
125 CL-215s were built 1969-90, and while a turboprop modernization/conversion is offered for these, all new construction of turboprop versions are the CL-415, which has 10% more payload capacity.
76 CL-415s had been built from 1993 through March 2011.
Bager1968For those of us “search-engine-challenged”, could you post the link so we can see the story?
That was 7 months before I joined the forum.
Bager1968As for why a helicopter pilot-trainee would be flying a T-6 Texan prop trainer… normal practice was to fully qualify as a pilot on prop-driven fixed-wing aircraft first, and then begin training on helicopters.
Bager1968As for why a helicopter pilot-trainee would be flying a T-6 Texan prop trainer… normal practice was to fully qualify as a pilot on prop-driven fixed-wing aircraft first, and then begin training on helicopters.
Bager1968For a monetary compensation, perhaps… but can they replace the item itself?
Which is, after all, the whole point of the collection… to have actual pieces of history, not a cheque for their estimated market value!
Bager1968For a monetary compensation, perhaps… but can they replace the item itself?
Which is, after all, the whole point of the collection… to have actual pieces of history, not a cheque for their estimated market value!
Bager1968Advantages of helicopter :
-compared to fighter helicopter have much slower speed and don’t have jet engine so they have very low IR signature
that what i mean because i was questioning the effective of radar guide and infrared missile against stationary cold target
Helicopters are big, juicy targets for modern weapons.
…..
I’m quite surprised anyone believes they would be virtually stealth. Intercooled exhaust and upward pointing exhaust mixers are better suited to hide heat from ground-based systems. Not effective hiding from fighters.
moon_light seems to think helicopters still use piston engines.
He seems to not know that all but the smallest personal helicopters have used shaft-turbine engines since the 1960s.
For ml’s education, shaft-turbines are jet turbine engines that have a gearbox attached which drives propellers or rotor blades.
Some are geared, which means they have a mechanical connection between the main shaft of the turbine and the gearbox, while others use a separate turbine section driven by the exhaust of the main turbine to drive the gearbox. The second type is called a “free-turbine”.
Bager1968If people wish to go ahead and form museums then that’s great, equally however people should be allowed to enjoy their aeroplanes without their every move being scrutinised and interpreted (often incorrectly) by folks, however well intentioned, that don’t actually input into the running of the organisation.
Just because we may have a passing interest in a subject does not give us any grounds to make demands of people’s hospitality nor expect to have them justify or explain themselves to us.
If I were to ever acquire a historic aircraft, it is quite likely that, having read what is posted on this board over several years, I would specifically try to keep the news from reaching the posters here.
While many of you are excellent people who respect the wishes of others and only post what has been confirmed as true, there are a depressingly high number who see nothing wrong with posting random unsubstantiated rumors, info that has specifically been asked NOT to be spread about, or even bald-faced lies if someone annoys them.
All in all, this is not a place to talk about things unless you are willing to be abused and sabotaged, as well as being helped, applauded, and appreciated.
Bager1968If people wish to go ahead and form museums then that’s great, equally however people should be allowed to enjoy their aeroplanes without their every move being scrutinised and interpreted (often incorrectly) by folks, however well intentioned, that don’t actually input into the running of the organisation.
Just because we may have a passing interest in a subject does not give us any grounds to make demands of people’s hospitality nor expect to have them justify or explain themselves to us.
If I were to ever acquire a historic aircraft, it is quite likely that, having read what is posted on this board over several years, I would specifically try to keep the news from reaching the posters here.
While many of you are excellent people who respect the wishes of others and only post what has been confirmed as true, there are a depressingly high number who see nothing wrong with posting random unsubstantiated rumors, info that has specifically been asked NOT to be spread about, or even bald-faced lies if someone annoys them.
All in all, this is not a place to talk about things unless you are willing to be abused and sabotaged, as well as being helped, applauded, and appreciated.
Bager1968In the US, the primary Air-Traffic-Control System has not used “primary radar” (radar that detects aircraft via bouncing signals off their skin) since the late 1980s… except as a local emergency back-up and for close-in control in the immediate vicinity of the airport.
The system relies almost entirely on transponders in the aircraft telling the ATC where they are, what their airspeed & course are, and who they are.
In Europe the system is even more dependent on transponders… including a new mandatory system where the aircraft computers talk directly to each other to avoid collisions.
In this environment, the ability to “paint” an aircraft is almost irrelevant, and a stealth aircraft is treated (and acts) just like any other aircraft until it decides to “go dark”… which it will only do if shooting starts.
Note that this is what caused such problems on 11-9-2001… aas soon as the hijackers turned off the aircraft transponders, the only way for anyone to track them was by the North American Aerospace Defense Command radar systems… and it took quite a while for the ATC to realize that they needed to talk to NORAD
Bager1968It is always amazing to me how regular posters on these boards, who seem otherwise intelligent and well-informed, seem incapable of comprehending that there are no “low-hour” F/A-18A/B/C/C+/D Hornets or AV-8B(Night-attack)/B+ available for anyone other than the USN/USMC!
Somehow these people seem to have completely missed the dozens of links to news articles describing the re-activation of early F/A-18 airframes from AMARG to replace time-expired later-model Hornets, or the unplanned purchases of extra Super-Hornets because there are now no more “low-hour” Hornet airframes at AMARG to re-activate!
Or the recent discussions of how the USMC bought the 72 GR.9 Harrier IIs from the RAF in order to extend the service life of the AV-8B(N)/B+ fleet specifically to allow earlier retirement of its Hornets because of the flight-hour crisis with the Hornet fleet!
And the fact that the USMC has kept 16 of those ex-RAF GR.9s intact “just in case they are needed as fliers later”, because the AV-8B/B+ fleet is also running on the edge, with the non-upgraded AV-8B airframes at AMARG being raided for wings and tailplanes to keep the AV-8B(N)/B+ fleet flying (thus the USMC jumping at the chance to buy those GR.9s).
All of these things have been discussed aver and over and over not only here but on every other military discussion board I have seen… and still regular posters keep coming up with “just get some low-hour aircraft from the US” co-called “bright ideas”, as if they have had a divine inspiration.
Bager1968could you give me link about these exercises :p just curious what the new tatic the jet have
No new tactics, just that that initial success was an ambush by two AH-1Ws with nothing else to do but wait for the fighters to show up, while the assorted later exercises had the helos carrying out normal missions when the fighters showed up*.
Therefore the helos were not “ready & waiting”, so they were not able to find a good shooting position to start the fight.
* And yes, these were several different exercises over the years… there have been no specifically-designed “helo vs jet” exercises that I know of which involved US forces since that first one.
Sign In
