dark light

TomcatViP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 4,141 through 4,155 (of 5,621 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: AirAsia Airbus A320 gone missing #486579
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    A rather complete report by Reuters with Black boxes, search update, lack of proper license investigation and insurance commitments:

    Search for the black Boxes in good path

    “We found what has a high probability of being the tail of the plane,” Yayan Sofyanβ€Ž, captain of the patrol vessel[…] “I am not saying it’s the tail yet,” the head of Indonesia’s search and rescue agency, Fransiskus Bambang Soelistyo, told a news conference in Jakarta. “That is suspected. Now we are trying to confirm it.”

    Thirty-seven bodies of the mostly Indonesian passengers and crew have been recovered, including some still strapped in their seats. Many more may be trapped in the body of the aircraft.

    The transport ministry said some officials at the country’s airport operator and air traffic control agency who were involved with the AirAsia flight will be moved to other duties while the accident investigation is completed.

    The ministry gave no reason.

    “A circular has been signed by the transport ministry on December 31, stating that pilots must have a face-to-face briefing with a flight operation officer so the briefing officer will know the pilot is in a healthy condition and so on,” said Djoko Murjatmodjo, acting director general of air transportation.

    Aviation experts said this was a common practice in the industry, but it was not immediately clear if it has been normal procedure in Indonesia.

    While the license investigation could have serious consequences for the airline’s operations, insurance industry experts said insurers were expected to pay claims whether or not the airline was properly licensed to fly on the day.

    It’s too early to say so, but I have the impression that Indonesia will stand rather as an example in the way it handles this awful crisis.

    Source:
    http://www.reuters.com

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2239916
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    MkII.

    MkI seems now to be just a matter of funding HAL IMOHO

    in reply to: Boeing and Airbus – a match made in heaven? #2239922
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    +1

    in reply to: "in hindsight, they should've bought this instead" thread #2239925
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Ok understood. I completely agree. But the Growler is a nice little temptation when Boeing start marketing their fighter.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2239931
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    […] Check cost of other deals including 100% or so ToT…

    Hummm… The Su30MKI? πŸ˜‰

    in reply to: "in hindsight, they should've bought this instead" thread #2239975
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    i don’t see how you can justify the extra expenses on logistic with Raf when you have alrdy SH in your fleet… It does not make any senses.

    If you had in mind that Au shld have bought Rafale instead of SH, then that could be discussed rationally.

    But by the way, shld hve Australia bought Tiger and NH90 ? πŸ˜‰

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2239978
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Just seems neither side (for its own reasons) has the guts to admit it publicly yet….

    More probably, India makes some efforts to not to humiliate Fr and ban itself from access to its mil markets and products.

    The sad part is that the ones in charge on the other side are in a complete denial mode and that immature posture refrains them to put the momentum on others Products or what ever I don’t know that could balance the loss.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2240145
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    The synergy for PAK-FA/FGFA radar, EW & ESM systems is probably what the Russians plan for the ‘Super-30’ MLU. Along with domestic upgrades for Su-30SM, Su-35S and non-PLAAF ‘Flanker’ exports, the potential economies of scale for these upgrades are positively huge and make their current very expensive R&D programmes (thru to 2020), commercially viable.

    Any additional follow-on order for the Su-30MKI would raise a smile in Moscow, and why not? I would highly doubt the Rafale T4 would be a match for the ‘Super-30’ – at least in A2A.

    As an aside, Defence Minister Parrikar may have let slip the unit cost of Rafale T4: over $120m!!!!!!!!!!!!

    http://www.janes.com/article/47533/indian-defence-minister-admits-complications-in-rafale-talks

    You are absolutely spot on.

    Between, there was no way the Raf could have been cheaper than a SH. This kind of attitude is what make Fr industry loosing deals: undercutting with no basis of reality and then raising their prices as the “Political” back-up and man to man arrangements fed away with time.

    It remind me the KCX. Airbus came with a project that was not even a tanker (see the MRTT that have to be designed entirely to become something with some Military use). With such a trend, the wall is just on the next corner for their aero Industry.

    The unit cost of the Su-30MKIs being licence-built by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) was less than half that of a Rafale.

    Also add the lack of any global strategy when it comes to ToT. As I hve noted before, it didn’t make any sens for India to buy Fr tech when it started pouring from other sources… and certainly on a cheaper form in overall!

    So the MKI Update is a very strong candidate. That and the Teja now taking (real) shapes, makes India enough self sufficient and confident to rely on more restricted tech. What exactly was at the very basis of the Fr deal as marketed by Dassault itself…

    Notice also the list of “Events” and the personal “agenda” of Top level Fr officials when it comes to Global strategy that inhibits any momentum around the Fr military products (seen as a complete product – more politically tied than systems that tends to be more “technical” buy) . Despite what some might think, customers still buy expensive Fighters because it increases their level of security, not the other way around (see that painting πŸ˜‰ ).

    Think about it: even if North Korea could produce a Top Notch low cost fighter of its own, nobody would buy it in the region.

    Source (as cited from above post):
    http://www.janes.com

    in reply to: How would you re-build the Argentinian military aviation? #2240706
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Frankly, the tide has turned away from the old bellicose days of Argentina. Up to the finest politicians in Uk not to make it back just for a matter of internal policy. I have in mind that it’s a matter of a national interest if we speak in term of direct benefits for UK Economy: secure that straits, build strong ties offshore to ease the logistic, make the F/M a rear base for the next big moves for the Industry: the poles (not the north in that case, obviously πŸ˜‰ ).

    And in term of aviation, an indigenized Gripen will be no match for a Typhoon with updated systems for a long time.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (2015) #2241352
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    awesome find @eagle, and we need not second guess what the future is,
    when speed is not the top priority

    Oh yeah… And let’s bring back the Spitfires.

    Turbines, by design, are very efficient engines and their consumption is mostly related to their range of power at equal technology. And how funny it is, their power fulfill a requirement in line with their user…policy.

    This twisted interpretation goes nowhere.

    You’re not going to counter a J10 with a Reaper ! Damn, Is this still an aviation Forum ? Can’t we keep in 2015 the level of discussion above that level ?!

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2014 #2241467
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Thanks for reporting so much in 2014!!

    +1

    That was amazing. Thanks!

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2242303
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Have you ever rolled an airplane ? Even in a Simulation ? You wld know that you can ctrl the amount of “pitch down” your aircraft get. [JokeMode=On] Next time, try to push frwd that weird thing sticking out b/w your knee πŸ˜‰ [JokeMode=Off]

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2242337
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    TVIP – So what you’re suggesting is that the F-35 will be as agile as an F-104? Maybe. It will certainly never be as good-looking.

    Your lack of discernment when it comes to the 35 is turning increasingly worrisome. Where did you get that idea ? L. I. F. T. and roll. That should not be that difficult to browse it even on Google? Plenty of handy books also dealing with aerodynamics.

    When the aircraft turn upside down around it’s vector of displacement, the amount of downward translation is proportional to the difference of airfoils lift. To simplified, If the wing had a symmetrical profile, there will be no vertical motion once the aircraft is rolled perfectly on its back.

    What is noteworthy in those sequences is that the aircraft get a large amount of down drift that reflect the “efficiency” of it’s thin and small wing if we speak in term of surface area. This in contrast to all the slide rule “experts” claiming that the plane have a too small wing to be of anything useful during a fight.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2242410
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    TVIP – Nice party trick. Note that despite low speed there is no altitude loss in the roll.

    That’s exactly what you have to look at. That and a book of basic aerodynamics (Lift profile, thickness ratio etc..)

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2242519
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    After all these years, the most spectacular flight maneuver they can show is a two-second-plus roll (0:19>>) during which the jet drops like a fat pheasant taking a blast of 12-gauge to the kidneys.

    As you may hve noticed alrdy as an aviation enthusiast, that kind of roll gives a good indication of the lift generated by the wing profile and other artifacts as compared to its “surface only” lift.

    In that case, that kind of filmed sequences depicting the 35 during a roll are very encouraging and should hve stopped long ago most of the debater claiming that the wing area of the bird is too small.

    Have a look here (sry it’s another LM plane):

Viewing 15 posts - 4,141 through 4,155 (of 5,621 total)