you pee into basically a plastic bag with some absorbent crystals in it

Maybe (btw the ~140m is the 2007 URF based on a 20 unit buy.) But if for some reason the F-22 resumed production, I would want to significantly update the avionics suite – after all it’s a 20 yo airplane.

and there is the whole problem and one of the main reasons why it was canceled, it wasnt designed for spiral development

2 Commando Regiment and SAS Regiment do not fly helicopters in support of SOF. 171 Squadron does.

i was keeping it simple
they arent getting rid of the whole s-70 fleet, they are keeping some for sas last i heard about 2 yrs ago

Incorrect.

The Army MH90 is planned to service with Army Sep/Oct 2011 for deployable transports, the S-70A-9 will remain with 171 Squadron till 2014. It will take a couple of years for the MH90 to have the same amount of maturity in the counter terrorist role (sniper mounts, extra rappeling points, etc) as the in service S-70A-9. In any case 171 Sqn is based in Holsworthy, NSW and usually supports 2 Commando Regiment – they have the east coast CT role (SAS Regiment is based in Swanbourne, WA and has the west coast CT role).

i didnt say 2nd commando were going to run s-70 into the future
i said sas’r were, as per what was said a couple of years ago
i havent heard anything saying this has changed

“”””maus92 said
Currently, LM states that the URF for F-35A’s will be ~60m (2010yd) – if current production figures are held (btw, CAPE says ~80m URF,) and the Pentagon budgeteers say ~112m AUPC (2010yd). So there are the glaring differences. A non-US operator should expect to be spending considerably more money per unit to field and operate the aircraft””””

no its the other way around, the usa eats most of the R&D
partners will buy at the URF price
non partner FMS sales will be URF + 3%? fms charge

Spud –

Good point on Partners (vs FMS), via their MOU, as not likely being able to swap out components, including DIRCM. But again, was just emphasizing that the actual DIRCM’s supplier is probably not yet selected – i.e. various candidate systems are probably still under development.

Accordingly, it is opinion that certain anticipated notional block V upgrades (such as DIRCM and possibly even the 6x internal AMRAAM) will have possible integration accelerated now, into a notional but delayed block IV. (or at least should, in order to maintain competitive). Waiting until 2020 +/- to have those notional capabilities operating in block V IOC status just doesn’t seem competitive imho.

what other dircm programs are aiming for the f-35 ?
the uk typhoon will also have the aussie dircm

jackjack,

The point of the mica-IR is to have the IR option (if the EM option fails due to jamming for instance) sooner than others. So yes it matters as you don’t need to wait for the merge before firing your IR missile. It dramatically increases your survivability.

As for other scenarios like when you need to get closer to the ennemy for a positive ID, then with the rafale you have the OSF which allow you to positively ID a target from a good safe distance (up to 40km).

So if the Mica IR is proprely used in terms of tactics it will leave little chance even against fighterjets with HMS.

I’ll answer other posts tomorrow;)

i understand what you are saying, perhaps you should bump the old topic on french site airdefense and tell them why they are wrong

i know usa was nice to you and updated your awacs, perhaps you should use ID ranges and IFF systems that is also on the rafale ‘gunna get’ list than the 40k rafale that you talk about, ‘good safe distance’ is totally wrong