Well that’s what I was looking at also, yes it is viable that Sydney would be a name available since the current Sydney would have paid off by the time the last AWD has been launched.
Thanks for those Steve, this article is very through and also talks about the other designs and their limitations, the mono hull one onbeing able to carry one Seahawk sized helo or two VTUAV’s. It says only the Austral design can operate two Seahawk sized helos at one time or one CH-53 or six VTUAV’s (VTUAV’s are Vertical Take-off UAV’s)
It also goes on ton talk about the weapons involved for both Australia and America and how America is focussing on “In close” combat where as Australia doesn’t need the same restrictions and is freer to look at more conventional armourments
Steve, mate thought you and anyone else here who have an interest in the LCS program might like to know, the RAN are looking into a study of these designs in an eventual aim to buying upto four of them.
Nothing has been formally announced as yet but the confidence in Austral has grown since the design was chosen by the USN for their purpose. If the USN has chosen it then it must be ok for someone like Australia to have them surely.
What has really caught my eye is the Rafael Protector system USV. If the LCS has four of these systems whilest on deployment it could virtually run a self protection screen around it out to about four kilomenters. Incciednts like the “Cole” would never happen again and that is a comfort in any book.
Well now I feel stupid, it turns out that my merchy friend is already here (hi neptune), though the confussion comes from him using a new name.
I think you’ll find that what they are refering to is most ships of that capability. Carriers can usually cover between 150-200 miles
Well if ever you are down this way my friend, I’ll take you flying in one with a Lincon 180Hp engine in it, it’s rated for +6:-4
Thanks for this Steve. It is an interesting concept and one that I do hope becomes a more familiar sight in the waters of the world
I don’t know about that, Japan is more intent these days on self reliance and if the C-27J is to be entered in service they’d want to build it in their own country. Given this i’d say that they’d be working hard to make sure the C-X does work thus decreasing the need of outside influence
it’s not hard to believe that, especially since the Chinese have stated that they will have obne carrier by 2008 and a fleet of carriers by 2010, though for security they’d be making them in seperate locations, makes sence to me
Goodness another Welshman, Body dar boyo? My other half is Welsh, If I only knew, what I should do… hehehehe.
Got any lovely coal to burn?
Hey guys, sorry if this has already been said but in the latest issue of “Defence Today” they have an article about the Varyag and how it’s been given PLAN colours and is now undergoing a refit which is actually a final fit out.
There is a pic from Dock side close up (which is interesting because till now they have tried to hid the pics) and also there is a pic of a new Su-27KUB on deck trials with no paint on it. This is being touted as a Chinese plane but I don’t think she is on a deck, more like a deck sim on land, perhaps the training facility in Odessa, unless they now have one in China itself.
Ahhhh ok well good to know that my topolgy is still up to scratch, as for the plane, I should have checked my Orbats better first, it’s a SAAB Safari, sorry!
So what were they like to fly? Comparable to our old CT-4’s?
Nice pics Vip, thanks for sharing them. The Army Pic looks like Budafoss in Norway, am I close? and the Chair flying looks like an Sk-60.
Interesting stuff and when is the C-X anticipated in the air?