…silly DoD had no reason to lower KPP to get F-35 qualified, right ?
it didnt meet objective, it didnt meet threshold,
-no problem, just lower threshold and issue a standing order of coverup pep-talk

The US Department of Defense’s decision to relax the sustained turn performance of all three variants of the F-35 was revealed earlier this month in the Pentagon’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation 2012 report. Turn performance for the US Air Force’s F-35A was reduced from 5.3 sustained g’s to 4.6 sustained g’s. The F-35B had its sustained g’s cut from five to 4.5 g’s, while the US Navy variant had its turn performance truncated from 5.1 to five sustained g’s. Acceleration times from Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.2 were extended by eight seconds, 16 seconds and 43 seconds for the A, B and C-models respectively. The baseline standard used for the comparison was a clean Lockheed F-16 Block 50 with two wingtip Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAMs.

So rattling out the same old crap as usual, harping on about this, so explain to us why this needs to be ? why in your opinion do you think this needs to be done ? what are the benefits ? what will it achieve ?

The French most likely played it safe without endangering their SSN and likely gave details of their most advanced conventional sub in physical form which happen to be the IN’s scorpenes.

You have got to be kidding me ! do you seriously believe what you have written here ? One of the most unbelievable statements I have ever read ! So by your thinking DCNS must have presented plans for the Agosta Class to India in their bid to win the contract to build the Scorpene Class ?

You obviously just have an issue with Australia, get over it.

Without any details analysis to explain why , this kind of thread is a waste of bandwidth

where is the like button ?

We can go around a lot talking about this. But let me take one thing that came to my mind….and this is specific to the Aussies.

This leak, I feel, by the Aussies now, when IN’s first of the Scorpene class/INS Kalavari undergoing sea trials and is to join the fleet in few months time, is showing the middle finger to the Indian Navy and India saying – u f$king morons we know everything about your new submarine fleet. Things like these are likely to have an impact on the crew morale who are “forced” to sail out on a “compromised” sub.

Do not forget, Indian’s have very bad memory, that Aussies were the ones on duty to check the IN in the IOR and one of the requirements (as per reports) during the Aussie sub tender was not to share any of the designs or stuff with India. The Aussie subs requirement is for their operations in IOR (among others) and their adversaries/challengers list include Indian Navy. It wont change in any foreseeable future.

Regarding the leak itself, France had nothing to loose once they pocketed the multi-billion dollar contract for six Scorpenes from India, so someone from them likely shared the details with the Aussies on demand from the Aussies themselves earlier in the process itself. Germany & Japan also seems to have shared such details regarding their submarines on offer and this somehow happened to come out of that “closed” briefing. Aussies specifically might have demanded all details regarding the Indian submarine and the French manufacturers (known for their commissions/bribes) might have offered it as a bribe (not the whole package, but part) to clinche the deal.

JMHT…

What a load of rubbish

Current reports are that the documents were actually leaked by a former French Naval Officer who was working for DCNS, so the information has been taken from France and not leaked from India.

Although from an Australia context, this is not an issue on the submarine type, as Jonesy has pointed out above, and has been played down by the PM and Defence, there are much broader issues for the systems Australia intends to use with the Shortfin, this leak will play havoc with Australia gaining FMS approval from the US for the Combat systems etc. Questions will be asked, and special procedures and requirements will now be put into place to protect relevant information. DCNS and France will have no choice but to agree to all if they wish to have the contract, because if the US do not supply the kit we want, the French will not get the contract

Cheers

Damping seems inapropriate. The back and frwd heads moves won’t left a pilot with hundred of cycles unhampered. No one want to reach a point where pilots start to complain.

The helmet is balanced in its forward and rear sector to lessen pilot fatigue. With the acceleration imparted by the launch, the wobelling is more severe in amplitude, forcing on the pilot neck. That is what I see on the video. It’s not an hundred of pages sciences exposé.

If I am right, it’s nada to do, you know. They won’t poor billions to correct this.

And you figured that out from one Youtube video ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rAWViXFv8A

Guess the Hornets have major problems too hey

RNZN reveals further details of new fleet tanker

A little more expansion here

http://www.navy.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/navy-today/nt202.pdf

Australian govt. body criticizes domestic submarine build plan

Not sure what they are on about ? A 30% premium on a domestic build is well within acceptable limits, and certainly worthwhile in the longer term for the ongoing domestic industry and maintenance. A 12 sub build means a continuous build, economy of scale come into play and pays back into the Australian economy.

Cheers