dark light

Boom

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 7 posts - 871 through 877 (of 877 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Will India end up with both the F-35 and t-50? #2392123
    Boom
    Participant

    Wouldn’t this make India a severe over match for Pakistan?
    Should we sell the paks F-35s to keep balance?
    Would the U.S. be more forgiving with the tech transfer if we get to look at the T-50?

    Discuss, what impact will this have on the Sub continent?

    a few points,
    > India is already a overmatch for pakistan,
    > when was the last time you sold anything worth more than a couple of million $ to pakistan ? mid 80’s ? the correct question would be “Should we donate the paks F-35s(worth upwards of 100 million) to keep balance?”
    even then it is doubtful you can ‘keep balance’, since as of now there is no balance in the first place.
    You are looking at a black-hole for resources if you try to ‘keep balance’ by donating to pakistan.
    > most unlikely US will get a look at the PAKFA/FGFA even if F-35 is on the table.
    > there has been no indication from India that it is interested in the F-35, certainly none from the IAF. there has been a rumour that IN might be interested but that is, again, a rumour unless confirmed.
    > nor has there been any indication from the US govt that F-35 will indeed be cleared for sale to India. LM can say whatever it wants, they don’t make the decision.
    > impact on Indian sub-continent, none.

    in reply to: Taiwan's growing fighter gap with China #2392878
    Boom
    Participant

    I doubt it would be easy to integrate a sub-munitions warhead on a SRBM that impacts the target at a few mach. given the complexities of aerodynamics and the need for proper orientation of the penetrators on impact it just might be too complex to be used on BMs. as of now I haven’t read of any such ongoing effort. perhaps you know something I don’t ? 🙂
    cruise missiles however might be a much better bet.

    in reply to: Liam Fox, Ministry Of Defence…Whats Planned? #2393485
    Boom
    Participant

    http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k260/rameau_/smileys/rofl.gif

    in reply to: Taiwan's growing fighter gap with China #2393488
    Boom
    Participant

    100 kg? You’re thinking of Iraqi modified Scuds, with warheads sacrificed to extend the range. The missiles facing Taiwann have warheads from 600 kg to over 2 tons. And even 100 kg of HE makes a much bigger hole than 1 metre.

    With a flight time of a few minutes, redeploying significant numbers of fighters before the missiles hit is unrealistic. Do you think every fighter is fuelled, ready to go, with the pilots ready & waiting?

    swerve, but what is the accuracy of these BMs ? the CEP has to be around 10 m for these systems to be effective in anti-runway role. aren’t the CEPs of these SRBMs quoted in 100’s of metres ?

    in reply to: RAN Sub force- to nuke or not to nuke #2001290
    Boom
    Participant

    No. Japanese policy prohibits it. Japanese law allows military exports, & trabsfer of technology. The law requires, & allows for, export permits. The policy is that permits will not be issued.

    It would be hard to change Japanese policy. Not impossible, mind you – Japan co-operates (selectively) with the USA on the development of military technology, this being an explicit exception to the general policy, which shows it’s not an absolute rule – but very difficult.

    given that overall policy is slowly changing, won’t they be amenable to collaborating with australia ? I guess australia and japan have no major issues and have close economic links, not to mention both are in a similar relationship vis-a-vis the US. since US does not have a current SSK that meets RAN needs japan seems to be the next best option and just might be possible if US leans over tokyo ?

    in reply to: RAN Sub force- to nuke or not to nuke #2001494
    Boom
    Participant

    why doesn’t RAN simply collaborate with the japanese and get a modified soryu ?

    in reply to: RAN Sub force- to nuke or not to nuke #2001507
    Boom
    Participant

    by cold fusion reactor do you mean “nuclear” cold fusion ? in that case I’m sorry to inform you that there’s no such thing in real life as yet and little chance there ever will be.

Viewing 7 posts - 871 through 877 (of 877 total)