dark light

TomcatViP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 5,371 through 5,385 (of 5,621 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: LRS-B #2253727
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Good point. That makes sense.

    TomcatViP
    Participant

    I do not think it would make sense. The F-35C, is going to be a capable Stealthy strike fighter for the Navy. Could it have been made better had it been an exclusive navy project. Sure. But it adds a ton of capability compared to any upgraded SH, and the pilots know this. Only thing that is against the F-35C is cost, but with only a handful produced, its early days yet.

    It’s probable we will see an enhanced 35 ten years from now. Let the threat mature and I am sure something would be drawn around the C to counter it.

    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Dear paralay, why multiply it by 0.35? thank you very much in advance!!

    One way, on station, back + reserve fuel

    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Forget Cuba, Angola is closer and does not require huge detours to avoid neutral parties’ sovereign airspace! The civil war raging there simultaneously might have been a nuisance though.

    Yes i was thinking the same. But I doubt they would hve bothered overflying en masse Venez, and Brazil departing from Cuba. They could hve drop some bombs on this major naval base south of Buenos Aires on the way (a nice place to relax btw).

    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Do you possess a map, would you care to look at the distances involved, I will concede the Bear might have made it that far on a 1 way trip.

    I don’t think the SU would have had sufficient tanker assets to achieve more than a token black buck raid.

    Edit the above assumes no SU ascension Island

    What abt Operating from Cuba?

    in reply to: Potential Syrian War – no fighter involvement? #2254647
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Totally agree.

    One should never draw lines in the sand unless they intend to back them up with strong action.

    In this case a throwaway line in a public statement has put the US in a position where it has to go to war. That’s quite insane by any standards.

    Yes it seems as it was a bad sentence. Two point: either Obama didn’t expect Assad and Co would hve pushed the atrocities that far either he was in needs of a revenge and pull a carrot out of his pocket for the donkey.

    Btw the way Assad’s wife is pushed frwd in the media tells me that he clearly knows what is going on.

    And I don’t believe Holland will retract. He is a fine politician too.

    in reply to: Turkish Air Force – News & Discussion #2254755
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    She is the daughter of the man from whom this plane got its name, Vecihi Hurkus.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vecihi_H%C3%BCrku%C5%9F

    Thx very much for the info. It makes sense now. 🙂

    in reply to: Potential Syrian War – no fighter involvement? #2254822
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Those photos are both stock images, both a long way from Cyprus. Forward deployment B-2 seems unlikely. That guy on Twitter also thinks an Arleigh Burke carries 450 TLAMS!

    Post deleted.

    in reply to: Turkish Air Force – News & Discussion #2254824
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Hurkus first flight conducted, congrats TAI :eagerness:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKCdLVBT1kw

    Let’s wait for the flat spin test

    Btw who is the white haired lady greeting the pilot (and the plane)?

    TomcatViP
    Participant

    Hum hum… Still Nobody hve discussed the fact tht we are talking of a Growler mod.

    More fuel for more system grow ( increased heat sink Effect)?

    Two short remarks also :
    1.The venting at the rear of the CFT is in line with the engines and cover a linear surface roughtly similar than the row of so called AESA’s vents
    2. The internal structure (frames) doesn’t happear to be symetrical, what is odd.

    Last but not least, the CFT are profiled like a wing. Their intended effect is similar than a centro-plane ala Su/Mig.
    The extended LERX act more like a flat surface on the SH (see the Teja prob). Increasing the thickness of that surface, decrease drag at a specific point (Mass and speed) by lowering the AoA,

    Also, the doc tell explicitly that the eng blocker and inlet will be modified. Other docs of GE suggest that part of the advent tech will be piped down to the present fleet of fighter. Hence we can expect a better eng efficiency in regard to stealth requierments, hence more power. However the doc made certain that the new engine is part of the deal when I made my mind (by reading) that the Navy was firm on that point ( no 414). Something is wrong here…

    TomcatViP
    Participant

    To only quadruple production in 4 years*? That is an astoundingly aggressive ramp and one which they undoubtedly won’t meet (at least, while maintaining quality).

    *Including incorporating the lessons learned from testing?

    Look at the pictures of the assembly line of the Raptor and current 35.

    This is not Alenia, Mig or Dassault.

    in reply to: PAK-FA thread about information, pics, debate ⅩⅩⅢ #2255033
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    […]

    http://cs7004.vk.me/c7006/v7006327/b045/BVEj85G7l7E.jpg

    This is real porn

    in reply to: F-35 News & Multimedia thread #2256480
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    F-35C operating off a Midway sized Fleet Carrier does the same.

    Whole point of AV-8 was support of USMC ground forces operating from LHD’s.

    However USMC then decided to not fit new LHDs with landing docks so they became LHAs which are essentially light carriers except without catapults and without ability to carry larger numbers of aircraft and specialists such as E-2.

    Plus USMC switching nearly completely to F-35B reduces Navy access to USMC squadrons for carrier ops as Marines are going from a majority of carrier capable F/A-18 force to a mainly STOVL F-35B force. USMCs carrier capable force will be limited to 80 F-35Cs as opposed to 200+ F/A-18s.

    So USN loses out and USMC gains further rationale for it’s own specialist fleet at expense of Navy.

    Overall US defence capability suffers as a result.

    When urgency matter, a flat deck is a flat deck. Even a century old RAF did agree with that 😉

    Yes the LHD need long range support but… Wait… Isn’t that cap alrdy fielded in the UCLASS prog?

    in reply to: F-35 News & Multimedia thread #2256497
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    There is one incredibly useful utility.
    On a landing spot beyond reach of land based tactical a/c, you will still want to reserve the ability to pick down patrol a/c,
    before they spot the amphibious fleet and call down a strike of long range bombers.
    A few F-35B can handle this, but without them you’re stuck to keep an entire CBG bogged down to stop a single patrol a/c

    No. Sorry to disagree. But the B is the dream of every admirals: a carrier force multilplier that allow you to extend your zona of influence without ressorting to a double CV force in front line.

    On its infancy the Sea Harrier just created that.

    in reply to: Potential Syrian War – no fighter involvement? #2256510
    TomcatViP
    Participant

    why take sides at all if your not taking strongly and create precedence for other?.

    That is the question

    Edit: Iran has just announced that it could retaliate against Israel in case of mil action against Syria. That’s an incredibly un-wise move from Iran. They will alianate Russia (Israel 91 is not Israel 2013 in term of population) and enable Israel and the US to double play on Syria/Iran.
    What an incredible move !!

Viewing 15 posts - 5,371 through 5,385 (of 5,621 total)