Page 39 – Key Publishing

Ja Worsley

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 571 through 585 (of 3,659 total)

← 1 2 3 … 38 39 40 … 242 243 244 →

Author

Posts
February 3, 2007 at 8:20 am in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2067178

Ja Worsley
Participant

Looks like the loosing design for Japans DDH project, interesting. Wonder if Fincanteri obtained the details of this design (of course we know that Japan isn’t allowed to sell weapons or plans to them 😉 )

As for the US allowing India to build the Super Bug, doesn’t exactly give the cause a good light now does it, I mean we all know how well India’s air craft industry is and we all love the Super bug don’t we :p

February 3, 2007 at 8:14 am in reply to: Viggen on carriers? Feasible or not? #2067182

Ja Worsley
Participant

Final solution (that sounds rather nazi like doesn’t it, sorry)… Look at the Gripen site for the official specs!

Gripen Technical Summary please note that it states a RM-12 engine and a MTOW of 14 tonnes.

As for the Viggen: Jane’s have it listed as:
AJ-37: RM-8B rated at 72.06kN Dry (no comment on Burner)

MTOW: 45,194 lb (20500 kg) — for attack

Has 4x underwing hard points and 3x underfuselage hard points for carriage of weapons to suite model (center line and inboard wing pylons are wet and fully plumbed for fuel, the SH-37 and SF (Later designated AJSF) models usually carried two wing mounted fuel tanks or one centerlined tank depending on the mission, they are also noted as still retaining the ability to carry MOST of the standard weapons load outs of the Viggen series which was standard doctrine in the Swedish Air Force (Svenska Flygvapen).

A-4M (heaviest of the skyhawks)

1x Pratt & Whitney J52-P-408 11,200lb (50kN) thrust

Normal Take off Weight: 24,500lbs (11,115kgs)

As stated, it was a great light strike fighter, but the Viggen is made for heavy duty work.

February 3, 2007 at 7:11 am in reply to: Super Etendard in air combat #2522710

Ja Worsley
Participant

Wow you are the man, interesting, there were reports that these planes were painted in two tone brown camoflage, but looking at these pics you can see that they wore standard Dark Ocean Grey as supplied to both French and Argentine navies.

February 2, 2007 at 7:02 pm in reply to: Viggen on carriers? Feasible or not? #2067231

Ja Worsley
Participant

Who’s carrier?

If the Olympus option was taken then the RN carriers of the time, would have been a better option than the F-4K’s. Then perhaps sold to the IN with the sale of Hermes. Could you imagine the RN flying these babies during the Falklands conflict 😀 😀 😀

Maybe for the FNS C. DeGaulle

Try again mate, at the time the French had Foch and Clemenceau but yes these would have been far better to operate than the F-8’s with their short legs (sorry getting goosebumps thinking about this). When the Brazilians bought Foch, they could have then also bought these beasts to go with it instead of buying A-4’s which don’t get much use. 😡

February 2, 2007 at 5:50 pm in reply to: Super Etendard in air combat #2523011

Ja Worsley
Participant

TBZZ: mate are you one of the few people that has any pics of the Iraqi SuE’s? We all have been dying to see some for a long time now.

February 2, 2007 at 5:39 pm in reply to: C-17's for Canada #2523020

Ja Worsley
Participant

Tiddles: Calm down mate :p

Swerve: seriously mate, do you think the Rn would allow anyone to borrow their borrowed ships? It’s like Ned asking to borrow his BBQ back from Homer :rolleyes:

Contrailjj: you’re right mate, they are Leopard C2’s not Challenger Mk.2’s (oh and BTW, I’m one of those boatnerds you speak of :p ) As for getting the tanks home from Afghanistan, well it’s kind of hard for a Ro-Ro to get in there since it’s a land locked country, guess the C-17’s are the better solution here :diablo:

TinWing: mate Quebec will have to bite its tounge won’t it, bleeders want everything don’t they- their own nation, their own industry, even their own aviation business, pah.

February 2, 2007 at 5:19 pm in reply to: C130 Germany #2523039

Ja Worsley
Participant

Anyway getting back on topic….
I did a bit of digging around and the only German C-130’s I can find are:

C-130K’s visiting German bases in support of British troops on excercise

C-130’s of various types in support of US forces in Germany

C-130B carrying the President of Bolivia to a conference at one point

Tp-84 (Swedish C-130) at a Luftwaffe open day.

There is also a reference to an Egyptian and an Iranian C-130 (both H models) transiting through Germmany but I can’t find any info about them landing anywhere- though they’d really stick out having the desert camo on them like they do. At a guess, the EAF would have been to and/or from Marshalls for electrical work and the IIAF (Not the IRIAF C-130 would have been a delivery flight.

February 1, 2007 at 2:39 am in reply to: F-111's to stay #2524115

Ja Worsley
Participant

I agree, I mean seriously, Senetor Falkner headed a board last year that also saw Dr Kopp on it (yeah I know that’s a draw back but it does give the case of presenting all sides of the argument).

No one has said the Super Bug deal has been signed, only that it was now being considered. The Typhoon has already had the CFT’s tested on it and that was also due to an Aussie requirement.

Another baffeling part of the JSF deal was: Traditionally the RAAF wanted twin engined fighters for ops over water, how on earth was the F-35 then selected? Sure you could counter that the lift engines count as a second engine, but that’s only a technical point.

Sadly this point also works against my prefered selection of the Gripen, which was ousted early in the process because of the single engine, weird how the Americans can offer a single engine type yet no one else can 😡

February 1, 2007 at 1:28 am in reply to: Viggen on carriers? Feasible or not? #2067330

Ja Worsley
Participant

What a kick in the pants the Olympus engine would have provided :dev2:

February 1, 2007 at 1:22 am in reply to: Canadian Navy cuts #2067339

Ja Worsley
Participant

This really doesn’t make any sence what so ever except in the form of the Canadian government turning into a bunch of pacifists.

What’s happening with the Sub fleet? Those are the real thorn in the side for the RCN.

For the JSS, has a design been selected yet? For that matter have they selected a design for the new surface combatant?

I agree that the Halifax class could last longer, especially since they have started going through their upgrade cycle (IIRC the first two have come out and the third is in now).

No sence in the Giffon fleet being drawn down and why pay off the CP-140’s. The Cannucks have gone mad 😡 :confused: 😡

January 31, 2007 at 8:10 am in reply to: Viggen on carriers? Feasible or not? #2067379

Ja Worsley
Participant

Sorry Swerve mate.

In this old mag I’m currently readin (Air Pictorial, August 1976) they have a big write up on the Swedish Air Forces’ 50th Anniversiary. They give the Viggen a good rap and liken it to it’s contemporaries also commenting (over stating more like it) it’s excellent STOL performance.

Another claim they make is the fact that had the Mirage family not been around, the Draken and Viggen might have had more export success, (now with a lot of American parts in the Viggen, I’d say that yes the Viggen might have made a carrier capable plane, bar one thing… American Industrial Politics).

January 30, 2007 at 11:54 am in reply to: My first international article #2067420

Ja Worsley
Participant

I’ve always liked the Tenix 85m Patrol vessel. It should prove to be a great investment for the RNZN and any further naval force that opts to buy them.

Here are some decent pics of a model on the defence models site of the boat, there are pics of the other vessels if anyone is interested

I particularly love the hanger area, but again, I think they could have mounted a better gun, call me old fashioned but you need something that’s going to make someone stop in their tracks and say “Ok we give” this little pop gun can make a lot of holes but the ship will still get away.

January 30, 2007 at 6:29 am in reply to: RN 801sqdn – the video #2067425

Ja Worsley
Participant

Don’t tempt me Scoot :diablo:

January 30, 2007 at 6:28 am in reply to: Viggen on carriers? Feasible or not? #2067438

Ja Worsley
Participant

My points exactly Badge, thanks.

E-2 wings huh? Interesting, though the Turkeys wing change was impressive to me.

January 29, 2007 at 9:34 pm in reply to: My first international article #2067457

Ja Worsley
Participant

Yeah mate I noticed the difference too, gonna have to have a word with the guys about that, but I do know that the last Freo is scheduled to pay off in the first quater of next year (08).

There is also talk of the RAN getting a “Corvette sized” group of vessels (between 6 and 10) to help with the Patrol duties. Half the fleet are to be based in the west and the other half based in Tassie, these are to help with patroling the Southern Ocean, especially the Patagonian Tooth Fish stocks, they are to have a helo deck for operation of both UCAV’s and helo and are to have a top speed of around 45Kts and strengthened for ice work. If this is true, it will boolster the Southern sector which is in need of a major asset like this. Can’t have lengthy chaces across half the world involving other countries to help us apprehend illegal fishermen (refer to the chace acorss the Southern Ocean with an Anzac class in 2005 and the old case of the MV Pong Su in 2003).
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 571 through 585 (of 3,659 total)

← 1 2 3 … 38 39 40 … 242 243 244 →