dark light

Spitfire9

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 2,413 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: US CAS rethinking going on #2173906
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    The problem with this is the incredible amount of recoil produced by the gun! Anything smaller than an A-10 would drop out of the sky if the cannon was fired for more than one second.

    It’s that pesky Isaac Newton throwing a spanner in the works again. That guy was a real problem, wasn’t he? 🙂

    But… seriously what mass does an A-10 have and what mass would a Scorpion (with the gun) have? Would recoil really be a killer for the Scorpion?

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2174139
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    The defensenews article above mentions SAAB seeing Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines as potential Gripen buyers. I can’t see why Philippines would be interested since they recently bought the KAI T-50.

    in reply to: US CAS rethinking going on #2175464
    Spitfire9
    Participant
    in reply to: USAF T-X #2178477
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    If this is going to be “a price shoot out”, can Boeing shoot lower than Lockheed? The T-50 is in service; development costs have been paid. The Boeing/SAAB proposal needs a large amount of money spent on development and testing.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2179494
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    yes, what happened to starstreak?

    I think whoever was running it stopped doing so and I have an idea that John Cook then kept it up for a time. If he’s out there somewhere and reads this, perhaps he would know if it still exists with a different URL.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2179837
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    that’s a lot of thrust from that engine. I don’t think this has been even demonstrated.

    I think that before the EJ200 was selected to power the Eurofighter the Eurofighter consortium asked for an engine that was designed in such a way that it could be modified to provide 20% more thrust. IIRC correctly that design was known as EJ220. Provision in the design for a A further increase in thrust to be possible was also required. 27,000lb thrust is a lot but the manufacturers were aware this might be needed. More than 10 years ago this info was on the eurofighterstarstreak site (that I can no longer find).

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2180967
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    Seems like the best idea for both Turkey and the UK is for the Royal Air Force to join the program as a full partner and get an eventual Typhoon-replacment.

    Any reason why Typhoons should not be fitted with TV (perhaps as part of a MLU)? I imagine that the research/development on the EJ200 was done with a view to applying it to Typhoon. If the main requirement for a TV Typhoon is a change in the flight control software, why not? I recall it being said that controlling trim at least in part through thrust vectoring would reduce drag.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2193834
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    Britain and Turkey signed a defense deal worth more than 100 million pounds on Saturday to develop Turkish fighter jets, opening the way to deeper cooperation over the lifetime of the project.

    In Ankara to strengthen ties with Turkey as she navigates Britain’s departure from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May hailed the deal, saying it showed “that Britain is a great, global, trading nation and that we are open for business”.

    The deal, announced by May and Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim, involves BAE Systems and TAI (Turkish Aerospace Industries) working together to develop the TF-X Turkish fighter program

    Thinking of the techno-political aspects of this deal (Turkey needs technology input from an acceptable foreign country), I can believe something could come of this. UK would probably like the option of ordering a non-F35 “strings-free” stealth aircraft in a decade or so. However, is 100 million or so a real commitment to harnessing BaE Systems? How serious is Turkey’s TF-X Turkish fighter program?

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2200566
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    Growing Global Ambitions: Japan and UK Developing Stealth Fighter Super-Rocket

    ‘The pair seek to develop a new air-to-air missile by the end of 2017…’

    Oh yea, Britain and Japan are just a few months away from having developed a new A2A missile, are they? Wonder where sputniknews got that from.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2200581
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    This post is in bad taste. A little respect for the pilot who lost his life?

    +1

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2202170
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    a backlog artificially sustained by the slow pace of production output… Don’t be mistaken by the nbr. Nor by the very weird financial incentives that led to the Egypt order. Although the situation is better than 2 years before (Raf line), a trend toward an equally slow pace decline can be outlined without being overly pessimistic.

    I think that the Rafale production rate was lowered to the minimum level at which the line could be run profitably so the assembly line could produce at a higher rate. Whether the supply chain has latent unused capacity allowing for a quick ramp up is a different matter. In any event with cross-trained assembly workers with expertise in both Falcon and Rafale assembly (according to one of the French members here), it sounds like Dassault is well placed to boost the production rate.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2131054
    Spitfire9
    Participant
    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2135410
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    i think its serviced by 1 technician & 8 conscripts, engine swap 1 hour, rearm-refuel =10 min.

    I think it is easy to accept or dismiss this claim. If an engine change in 1 hour has been done several times by 1 technician & 8 conscripts, it is a fact that the engine can be swapped in 1 hour by 1 technician and 8 conscripts (rather than an estimate). It would be interesting to know the man hours and skill levels needed to do this with other western fighters currently in production.

    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2135463
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    just because a website, blog or forum are not owned by corporations doesn’t mean they will not be biased.

    Just so.

    If code one is owned by Lockheed Martin then in my opinion it will be the best place to find information about LM products.

    Not just so. It is extremely likely that information which is positive in nature will be posted on the website while information that is negative in nature will be played down or omitted altogether. OEM’s do not use websites they support financially to present a balanced assessment of their products. As for objective assessment of their products, probably the least likely people able to do so are people who work for the OEM concerned.

    in reply to: Canadian Fighter Replacement #2138077
    Spitfire9
    Participant

    Best naval radar, best missile load (naval), best AoA, best info display, Credible Frontal RCS reduction … Best price.

    Yeah, the worst. Anything else?

    Is the interim purchase of 18 SH’s a genuine interim buy ie is there really an urgent need to buy something? Or is the buy a way of getting SH logistics paid for so that if it comes down to a choice F-35 v SH a few years from now buying 40 or so more SH’s will prove to cost far less than 40 F-35?

    If it came to paying (say) $6 billion in a deal for 40 F-35’s or $3-$4 billion for 40 more SH’s down the line, choosing F-35 would look like a very expensive choice, wouldn’t it?

Viewing 15 posts - 256 through 270 (of 2,413 total)