dark light

Ja Worsley

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 3,659 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Confused- help please #2422957
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Thanks Pete, I knew a second batch was imminent but wasn’t sure when it was due to arrive. As for the C7’s well as mentioned the Data Buses have been retrofitted on the older hornets to allow them to carry the weapon so stocks will soon be arriving as we did order them- this will carry over to the F-35’s I imagine.

    Now we did locally assemble a bulk of our Hornets here at Avalon, but they aren’t upgraded to C/D standard at all, they are a different sub-class being called the AM/BM class, similar to the EF-18’s in Spain and the CF-18’s in Canada. All the Classic Hornets of the A and B model needed an upgrade by mid 90’s and this was what they came up with.

    As mentioned above, the first 14 (the initial order) are to go to 3Sqdn based at RAAF Williamtown NSW (aka- Fighter Town Australia). Subsequent orders and aircraft will move to the other squadrons (76, 77 and 78) over time and when the aircraft become available. However 2OCU will be stood down due to the F-35 not having a dual seat trainer- 2OCU may become a dedicated simulator squadron and train the pilots at Williamtown, but no aircraft will be assigned. Aircraft will rotate periodically with ARDU over in South Australia with at least 2 based at RAAF Edinburgh at any one time.

    Just as a side note, I was searching for info on the RAAF Hornet upgrades when I found that the Diggerhistory site made reference to Thailand having the Hornets as well, Ummmmmmm, when did that happen?

    in reply to: Confused- help please #2423354
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Thanks Sam, I’ve been trying my sources but all i can come up with is that there are 24 with the first five already here (A44-202 through to A44-206) and that a contract covering the first 58 F-354’s has been signed (Noooooooooooo) with 14 going to 3Sqdn to start with.

    in reply to: Confused- help please #2423509
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    I hope so Geo

    in reply to: Military Cessnas (High-Wing Prop Types) #2423510
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    PII excellent threat my old friend and as always am happy to contribute from this neck of the woods.

    The Australian Army operated the Cessna 180A’s well as a few O-1’s during Vietnam, seven were deployed to the conflict of the 19 operated by 161 Recce Flight, 98 Squadron from September 1965 until February 1971 when they were replaced with Pilatus Porters.

    The Seven deployed accumulated a total of 16,150 hours and carried out 11,169 sorties during their time in Vietnam. Three other aircraft were written off in accidents with no loss of life. The first, A89-043, became the first Australian aircraft of any kind to be lost in Vietnam when, on 26 August 1968, pilot Lieutenant Steve Tizzard made a forced landing in a paddy field, following a propeller failure. Both Steve and his systems operator, Corporal Dick Schafer, were only bruised.

    HARS currently has a C-180C painted in this aircraft’s colours
    http://www.hars.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/dsc04954.jpg
    in it’s collection and though I have not seen it fly, I believe it is fully flight worthy. There are a number of sites on the web about Aussie 180’s in service.

    Another beauty is this example:
    http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/0/0/5/1189500.jpg
    Which is still registered and flying.

    Here are two sites for further information:
    ADF Serials- A98 range.

    History of Cessna 180.

    I also came across a Canadian L-19
    http://canavbooks.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/03-canadian-army-l-192.jpg?w=499&h=334

    The Canadian Army operated 25 Cessna L-19s from 1954 to 1973. Thereafter, many of the survivors became Air Cadet glider towing planes with civil registrations. Here is L-19E 119732 ready for a mission from Uplands (Ottawa) on June 9, 1972. It later flew as glider tug C-FTGU.

    in reply to: F-35B or 35C for future Indian Carrier? #2032555
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Anbody would think you have been talking to Carlo (I want the F22) Copp!:D Ja…

    Looks like new JBD are the order of the day!

    I spoke to him in person once at the Avalon 2007 do, this was when he was still trying to save the Pigs from the chop and still going on about how the RAAF should have bought the C747 rather than the C-17 due to commonality with Qantas. I tried to ask him about his Naval conclusions only to get told he had to take a call but it was nice chatting to me!

    And for everyy link u post I can post
    The oppisite. http://armoredd.com/blog/archives/3693
    U still haven’t provej beyond doubt that F-35w burn
    Decks. Remember 20klb cool down wash. (please excuse phone
    (excuse phone typing)

    I’m not trying to prove or disprove anything- you asked for links and there they are. I’ll let you argue with the person about this issue. But as I said, I do remember this being an issue back in the initial stages and also with the Yak-144 Freestyle.

    in reply to: F-35B or 35C for future Indian Carrier? #2032837
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    I had heard this before but I have never seen it in action, I did a bit of digging around and came up with this:

    [INDENT]

    Deck Damage

    The Pentagon’s Gilmore said in his report that the engine and power-systems’ exhaust on the Navy and Marine versions is powerful enough to pose a threat to carrier personnel. The blasts also may damage shields used to deflect heat on the deck, including on the CVN-21 carrier, the Navy’s most expensive warship.

    “Early analyses of findings indicate that integration of the F-35 into the CVN-21 will result in damage to the carrier deck environment and will adversely affect hangar deck operations,” Gilmore wrote.

    The Navy model’s exhaust area is larger than the Boeing planes’, making the jet-blast deflectors used during launch “vulnerable to warping and failure,” he wrote.

    Exhaust from the Marine Corp version’s integrated power system deflect downward and may be “a hazard to flight deck refueling, munitions, personnel and equipment” located on catwalks, the report said.

    Lockheed spokesman Chris Giesel said tests conducted with the JSF Program Office and the Navy “are showing positive results regarding compatibility of the F-35’s exhaust with carrier decks and tarmac surfaces. The study will conclude in spring 2010.”

    To contact the reporter on this story: Tony Capaccio in Washington at [email]acapaccio@bloomberg.net[/email].

    [/INDENT]

    Mind you this was when the program got underway.

    After further checking I have more info:

    Gates Sacks Stealth Jet Chief, Blasts ‘Troubling Record’ of Crucial Plane

    and this:

    Ministerial undersight of JSF falls to new low while its US critic Bill Sweetman is silenced

    These are dated from Feb 1 and May 11 this year respectively so I guess it is a serious problem. I remember this being a problem with the Yak 144 as well back when it was around.

    ***Additional***
    F-35 and V-22: Keeping it Cool on Deck

    in reply to: F-35B or 35C for future Indian Carrier? #2033368
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    India has already decided to but the PAKFA/FGFA which is expected to cost just as much.
    I never knew the prices came down with time, I thought it escalated over time and India ends up paying more than it originally bargained for. :rolleyes: perhaps you would provide an example or two to support this theory of yours ?

    Sure- The Hawk Deal- took them 20 years to work on that deal- the cost of the Mk-60 version came down as the Mk-100 versions came into being. As a result the Indian Mk-132 (or 115Y) is a combination of the Mk-60 with a couple of added Mk-100 series additions produced on the Mk-120/LIFT frame. India wants the best but doesn’t want to pay the price and therefore has to make up the lost capabilities in house (which does seem to work sometimes).

    Another example would clearly be seen with the LCA/Tejas aircraft- India wanted a good fighter that was cheap to build- they got it: 20 years later when prices of electronics and engines became a null matter to their respective companies as they had moved on to newer productions.

    At this rate the Indians could buy a J-79 or an Atar 9K play with it to make them better and still only pay pittance for each engine!

    lastly, except the gorshkov affair no other negotiation was held up purely on price matters.

    Tegas, Hawk and to lesser extents, Hermes and some small arms contracts were

    what does russian spies in US got to do with India ? :confused:
    I haven’t heard of any concern from US sources about possible tech leak to russia from India (other than from you) , mind elaborating how you came to that conclusion ? the concern about tech transfer to India in US is more about Indians getting a look rather than russians getting a look, which is a different kettle of fish altogether.

    The US is worried about Current political posturing in Russia- the gestures of re-instating long range bomber patrols and under ice Sub routes for Boomers. The US know that Russia has the capability and technology to produce counters to it’s fielded hardware where as Indian doesn’t (yet). The recent contract agreement between Russia and India to produce Transport aircraft has the US worried about their future logistics train (the C-130 can’t last forever). As for front line equipment- recent Red Flag excercises have shown that the Indian Su’s are actually superior to much of the current US equipment save the latest Raptors which are the only planes that gave them a run for their money- now with the F-35 having new equipment, India would happily aid their production partner (Russia) with a new products.

    I won’t call the P-8 particularly low risk but you are right that congress might block the F-35. then again, there were reports that LM’s offer was okayed by the pentagon.

    Since when does the Pentagon over rule the US Congress? It may have been oked by the PG, but Cong will look seriously at the deal. For now it seems to be going ahead, but only because of one stipulation- India supplies it’s own electronics!

    at the end of the day it also depends on whether the navy wants the F-35 and I’m not sure they do. 😉

    I agree- I don’t think the IN does want it- they are most happy with the current fleet they field, looking forward to the introduction of the Naval Tejas and though sad about the loss of the Harrier to their force- respect that every machine has it’s day. I heard an IN pilot say that the one thing they will miss with the SHar is the manouverability and versatility that it brought to the service- especially the Vertical launch and recovery.

    in reply to: L-29 over LHD-6??? #2033370
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Yes it is indeed a false economy and no one knows how better to hide the REAL costs than the US. Companies come in bidding low but then tack on extra costs that they deem as expences for operations. We had that happen here until it was busted open and the government locked in “Fixed Price” contracts- these days it’s harder to find any company willing to take on a military contract- there are some but not as many as there once was!

    in reply to: L-29 over LHD-6??? #2034268
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Rather than blaming them for spending more (too much) money, you are now blaming them for spending less (not enough) money?

    Not at all mate, I believe that all military training in every form should be handled by the military and not contracted out to corporate contractors who don’t really care about the country- just their profits.

    in reply to: F-35B or 35C for future Indian Carrier? #2034433
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    The thing that needs to be kept in mind here is:
    Will the Indians be willing to pay the huge price of the F-35 (which ever model is bought)?

    Remember how the Indian’s always sign up for buying things but take years to negotiate a lower price by which time the cost has come down anyway so they try to lower it further!

    Will the US (who really need funds atm) be willing to lower the price of the lightning to allow India to buy any? Given the recent debacle of the old Russian Spy ring in the US (what a joke that was), would the us allow the Indian’s to buy their premier fighter knowing that the Russians would some how get a look at them and thus produce a competitive version at a cheaper price some time after?

    Sure the US have started selling various military systems to India (the P-8 for starters), but that’s all low risk sales, the F-35 comes in as a high risk item and I don’t think the US are willing to go down that path. So while LM might be offering it, selling it isn’t in their court, it’s down to Congress who I would be really shocked if they said yes!

    in reply to: L-29 over LHD-6??? #2034439
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Getting back to9 the L-29’s, it seems the US is running out of money in a fast way if they are having to contract private firms to fulfill military training requirements.

    The two L-29’s
    http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/8/7/9/1409978.jpg
    N179EP

    http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/4/1/2/1627214.jpg
    N5959L

    Are privately owned planes who rent out their services in a similar fashion to many other “Week End Warrior” companies over there in the US.

    I know the USN are scratching around for $$$ but would this actually be an option that saves money? Most private ventures I know actually charge more. IMHO it would have been cheaper for the USN to use some of their T-45’s which better simulate the characteristics of modern day skimmer missiles, this evident by the RAAF using their Hawk Mk127’s in the same way during their regular excercises!

    in reply to: Crusty Russian Subs #2036268
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    I’ll bet I could find a home for them- hmmm come to think of it- I would love to make them home- I stayed a few months on a Foxtrot here in Sydney many years ago and I loved it- it was always warm compared to outside.

    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Yet another article that is very hard to understand due to the poor quallity of translation!

    Guys, I have said before that you MUST be careful of these types of things, many are actually produced by some Chinese kid in the politbeuro who has a good laugh every time he posts a pic.

    Do you honestly think that a copy of an Su-33 could have been made without anyone- let alone the Russians- knowing about it?

    To me the pic shows a white painted J-11 that could just as easily be a standard J-11 posted to a PLAN aviation unit as their older planes are now due for retirement. The PLAN has made no secret of this transformation happening and this could easily be the first actual pic of a PLAN J-11!

    As for China marketing their wares in other parts of the world- please have a clear look at where Chinese products are now in operation:- certain African nations (too poor to buy J-11’s) though they do come cheaper than their contemporaries, certain South American nations (Well I only know of two- Venezuela and Bolivia; FAV wouldn’t buy them as they have just bought front line aircraft from Russia Direct and the FAB are too poor to afford such planes in operation let alone actually buy them straight up). Brasil wouldn’t buy from China unless it was a huge benefit to them due to the global backlash that would follow if they made a deal like this.

    Again the bottom line is that if there were a J-15 out there, we’d know before it actually flew (we knew about the J-10 before it hit the prototype stage).

    in reply to: Camo Truders #2385941
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    Googler: 402 is painted the same as my 401 and both are A-6A’s from Vietnam, logic would dictate that this would have been a ground deployment from the Marines to that conflict rather than operating from a carrier which had the standard Grey White paint scheme- thanks for your contribution though.

    The one from 87 (the last one), looks like it is in Company colours meaning that this would have been a trials aircraft- the info says that it’s an A-6E though I don’t see the FLIR turret, thus my logic works here again- it’s a trials aircraft from the company.

    That first one though, that is interesting, thought the blue was done away with mid WWII

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2037553
    Ja Worsley
    Participant

    http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://wareye.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/chinaese-first-carrier-aircraft.jpg&imgrefurl=http://wareye.com/china-began-to-build-the-first-domestic-aircraft-carrier-the-navy-asked-the-project-to-accelerate&usg=__QCacO9tDs34yINoTMNTi2URs354=&h=281&w=500&sz=26&hl=en&start=63&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=fn5La09bnlLlHM:&tbnh=73&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Daircraft%2Bcarrier%2Bconstruction%26start%3D60%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26ndsp%3D20%26tbs%3Disch:1

    Did anyone else notice the very poor English in this publication? I would say that this was a translated text version of something written in Chinese. But it does corroborate info that has been leaked out over the past five years or so and goes further to specify which dock will actually house the vessel/s in upon construction (Dock 3) and which factories are putting together the pieces- though I take that information with a grain of salt considering that China never really tells the whole truth when it comes to state matters!

    Those of you (like me) watching via Google earth to see any developments in Dalian- look at the other ports as well.

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 3,659 total)