dark light

Bager1968

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 991 through 1,005 (of 3,360 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: JCA (C-27J) stripped from army #2355219
    Bager1968
    Participant

    In 1990 the USAF bought 10 Aeritalia G.222s, and designated them C-27A Spartan.

    These were all based in Panama, and were taken out of service in 1999.

    The C-27J is a Lockheed-Martin/Alenia modernization of the G.222 design, with the cockpit & engines of the C-130J.

    In actuality, only 21 of the C-27Js have actually been paid for, and there are only a handful of completed C-27Js in US inventory, all with Air National Guard units.

    A 2-aircraft C-27J detachment from the 179th Airlift Wing at Mansfield Lahm Airport,Ohio, is currently operating in Afghanistan.

    Note however, that the cancellation is at this stage just the DOD’s request… it still has to go through all the Congressional committees, as well as votes by both houses, before it could be signed into law.

    Since the aircraft is assigned only to ANG units, which also come under the authority of the States in which the ANG units are located, this is a very political issue.

    According to a senior Air National Guard official, operating a C-130J costs about $7,100 per hour, while the C-27J costs about $2,100 per hour.

    in reply to: General UCAV/UAV discussion – A New Hope #2355231
    Bager1968
    Participant

    ?
    I didn’t even know they are operated from carriers,
    how many in USN inventory ?

    In 1963, the CIA started project Whale Tale to develop carrier-based U-2Gs to overcome range limitations. During development of the capability, CIA pilots took off and landed U-2Gs on the aircraft carrier USS Ranger and other ships. The U-2G was used only twice operationally. Both flights occurred from USS Ranger in May 1964 to observe France’s development of an atomic bomb test range at Moruroa in French Polynesia.
    U-2 ops aboard USS Ranger video

    Testing continued through at least 1966, aboard the USS America: USS America CV-66 with a U-2

    However, none of the carrier-capable versions had inflight-refueling capability.

    U-2C: Enhanced single-seat model with J75-P-13 engine with 15,800-17,000 pounds of thrust and modified engine intakes

    U-2G: U-2C converted for carrier compatibility with arresting hook and accessories, rear fuselage beef-up, 50 degrees of flaps and extended main stoke main and tail landing gear (3 aircraft).

    U-2H: U-2G converted to inflight-refueling capability, found to be too heavy and converted back to U-2G (2 aircraft)

    This model had a wingspan of 80′ 2″ and a max take-off weight of 24,150 lb.

    The currently-operational U-2s are all the U-2S model, with a wingspan of 104′, a max take-off weight of 41,000 lb, and a General Electric F118-GE-101 engine with 18,300 pounds thrust, but these are not inflight-refueling capable. However, their lengthened wing includes two fuel pods, which increased range from 2,200 miles in the early models to 3,500 miles in the -R, 4,000 miles in the TR-1, and 4,600 miles in the -S.

    U-2R: Larger version of original U-2. Designed with carrier capability from outset with RX107 Hook Kit installed. 12 built.

    TR-1: Tactical Reconnaissance Aircraft (all aircraft redesignated U-2R). 33 built.

    U-2S: Re-engined U-2R with General Electric F118-GE-101 with 18,300 pounds thrust; the F118 engine is 30% lighter and 39 inches shorter and more fuel effect, than the J75-13B, and allows the “S” to cruise 1220 nm farther, and fly 3500 feet higher. It also has a new digital autopilot, and sensor wiring has been standardized.

    31 U-2R/TR-1s were converted to U-2S.

    in reply to: UK considers Rafale and F-18 as 'interim aircraft' #2355254
    Bager1968
    Participant

    I think something needs to be laid to rest as I a significant amount of confusion here!

    I’ll say!

    Any interim purchase or lease will involve the F/A18E/F Super Hornet (or Rafale – maybe those mothballed Rafale M – F1). In respect of the Super Hornet it could be made available for lease fairly easily from US stocks, as it is Boeing have capacity to ramp up production if needed.

    NO… the USN does NOT have spare Super Hornets lying around… all they have are in squadrons or in maintenance… that’s why they are still ordering more!

    So the ONLY way the UK could get some is to order them off the assembly line!

    in reply to: General UCAV/UAV discussion – A New Hope #2356197
    Bager1968
    Participant

    they succeeded in tanking the other day, using a surrogate. that’s pretty huge, as it proves the system can do that

    The Learjet successfully completed multiple air-refueling test points autonomously while commanded by a ground operator.

    Quit with the weasel-statements!

    If it was under the control of a ground operator it was NOT “operating autonomously”, and if it was “operating autonomously” it was not receiving commands from a ground operator.

    Sounds like the test got some “help” to actually work.

    in reply to: General UCAV/UAV discussion – A New Hope #2356977
    Bager1968
    Participant

    USAF Cancels Global Hawk

    It looks like USAF got tired of throwing money down the Block 30 rat hole.

    It didn’t open for me, but anyway why don’t you like Global Hawk ?

    Try this one:
    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awx/2012/01/24/awx_01_24_2012_p0-417750.xml&headline=U.S.%20Air%20Force%20to%20Kill%20Global%20Hawk%20UAV

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2358462
    Bager1968
    Participant

    While you are considering the F-22, consider it has growth-room.

    Apparently you completely missed the reality that the F-22 production line is closed, and will never re-open.

    in reply to: old aircraft tail wheel ? id please #2026994
    Bager1968
    Participant

    This should be in the Historic Aviation section, not here.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -IV #2027065
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Revert to F-35B. I don’t think it will come to that. The problem can be fixed, albeit that it might be expensive, but compared to the programme as a whole, quite small beer
    My personal opinion

    Well, since the F-35B is off probation… http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awx/2012/01/20/awx_01_20_2012_p0-416683.xml&headline=Panetta

    in reply to: Hot Dog's Ketchup Filled F-35 News Thread #2360099
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has lifted the F-35B Probation :-

    “The Stovl variant has made – I believe and all of us believe – sufficient progress so as of today I am lifting the Stovl probation.”

    Announced at Pax River today

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awx/2012/01/20/awx_01_20_2012_p0-416683.xml&headline=Panetta

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2360101
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta Lifts F-35B Probation

    By Amy Butler [email]abutler@aviationweek.com[/email]
    NAS PATUXENT RIVER, Md.

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has ushered the F-35B out of the penalty box, after the short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (Stovl) version of the stealthy fighter was sidelined for poor performance for more than a year by prior Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

    …..

    “We now believe that because of your work the Stovl variant is demonstrating the kind of performance and maturity that is in line with the other two variants of JSF,” Panetta said here Jan. 20. “The Stovl variant has made — I believe and all of us believe — sufficient progress so that as of today I am lifting the Stovl probation.”

    Read the full text at the link.

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2360105
    Bager1968
    Participant

    F-111 first combat deployment 1968

    Again, don’t know about you all, but WTF seems to be an even more than appropriate question to ask.

    ..

    Now add ~3 more years onto that 1968 “first deployment” date for the fatal structural flaws discovered during that nasty first combat deployment to be fixed.

    When did Australia finally get theirs?

    You know, the airframes delivered in 1969 straight from the factory to a warehouse to gather dust for another 3+ years?

    The “OK, we think we’ve got this right this time so we can start fixing these” refurbishment program actually began on April 1, 1972, with actual hand-over of aircraft starting 15 March 1973 and ending on 4 December 1973 when the last one arrived in Australia.

    Looks like 4 years to add onto the program times to me.

    in reply to: F-35A for Japan #2360110
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta Lifts F-35B Probation

    By Amy Butler [email]abutler@aviationweek.com[/email]
    NAS PATUXENT RIVER, Md.

    Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has ushered the F-35B out of the penalty box, after the short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (Stovl) version of the stealthy fighter was sidelined for poor performance for more than a year by prior Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

    …..

    “We now believe that because of your work the Stovl variant is demonstrating the kind of performance and maturity that is in line with the other two variants of JSF,” Panetta said here Jan. 20. “The Stovl variant has made — I believe and all of us believe — sufficient progress so that as of today I am lifting the Stovl probation.”

    Read the full text at the link.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News 2011 June – #2360114
    Bager1968
    Participant
    in reply to: Indian Navy – News & Discussion – IV #2027188
    Bager1968
    Participant

    Maybe this helps somewhat…

    http://brahmand.com/newsimages/558711550494b727b69d60.jpg

    Pic doesn’t show… go here:
    http://brahmand.com/newsimages/558711550494b727b69d60.jpg

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2366373
    Bager1968
    Participant

    The “only unknown”? Have you read the QLR? Because the report seemed to predict further issues in buffet and fatigue, talked about no answers to fix the IPP, and noted multiple HMD issues that have not been solved.

    Didn’t they just replace them with a new IPP designed to correct the problems?

    Was that addressed in the QLR… or was that part written earlier and not revised (a defect which permeates so many of these “doom & gloom” documents we have seen)?

Viewing 15 posts - 991 through 1,005 (of 3,360 total)