dark light

Witcha

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 841 through 855 (of 1,232 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Witcha
    Participant

    The way i see it is the three most probable buyers would be Russia, India, or Brazil. France is a long shot just because the local shipbuilding would go nuts if they bought it from the brits even though it was jointly designed.

    Though given the potential cost all three are unlikely at the moment. Russia may be interested because of the Mistral deal, but the Indians are probably burned by the Gorshkov sage and the Brazilians may consider such a large carrier as overkill.

    Russia: if bought one or even two would most likle keep the propulsion plant, shipboard management systems, but would replace all the ships sensors with Russian versions, ‘Top Plate’ (MR-760) and maybe a modfifed tombstone; and would install various russian weapons. Kashtans, AK-630M (the dual stealth version), SA-N- 9 SAM, and the RBU-6000 anti submarine mortar. It would then hold the SU-33 for the Intrem then the navalized PAKFA’s down the role

    Maybe the airwing would change, but I can see the Russians preferring the superior British sensor and electronics suite.

    India: If the IN got the CVF they could probably get the ship weapons and elctronics and whole but might replace the ships sensors and comm systems with indegious systems, or might go Italian. The combat system would be 3-4 76mm super rapids (same as on IAC-1 and 2) a smaller calibur gun (AK-630 maybe) and the Barak SAM system. Air wing would probably be Naval TEJAS and E-2D hawk eye that was recently authorized for the IN, maybe even F-35C down the line. Such a ship would replace delay and influnece the IAC-3 signifigantly

    Or they may decide to use the CVF as an excuse to buy the F-35B which the Indian Navy’s been eyeing for some time.

    Witcha
    Participant

    The only way this could get any more interesting is if the Russian Navy decided to buy it.:D

    in reply to: Indian Space & Missile Discussion II #1801120
    Witcha
    Participant

    Even for land use there are applications against sea(land)-skimming missiles, in particular ALCMs.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -III #2024758
    Witcha
    Participant

    Kaliningrad shipyard to build three frigates for Russian Navy

    The first three frigates for Russia’s Black Sea Fleet will be built at the Yantar Shipyard in the Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad, a shipyard spokesman said on Tuesday.

    Yantar won a tender to build three Project 11356 frigates last week, Sergei Mikhailov told RIA Novosti.

    “The construction of the frigates for the Russian Navy will be carried out in parallel with the construction of the same-type frigates for the Indian Navy,” Mikhailov said.
    Full Story

    Looks like they’re going for a ‘hi-lo’ mix of Gorshkov type and Talwar type frigates. The latter lacks the phased array radars and AEGIS-type SAM systems, but is cheaper as a result.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Часть 3! #2389888
    Witcha
    Participant

    There are lot of these new Tu-214SR Special Mission aircraft being procured , One can just guess what role do they do but there is a good write up on this.

    Probably SVR assets ?

    SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT FOR TU-214

    Pics Tu-214SR 1
    Pics Tu-214SR 2

    The new Tu-204SM looks quite promising until the MS-21 comes the Tu-204/214 will be the backbone of many special mission aircraft

    The description in you quote very much hints at a SIGINT information-gathering role.

    in reply to: Chinese 5th generation news speculation. #2389895
    Witcha
    Participant

    The basic B-2 bomber design and technology must be over 25 years old by now – surely the Chinese can do better at this stage?:confused:

    Doesn’t matter how old it was if they didn’t develop it in the first place.

    To summarise, the only thing known about the Chinese fifth-gen fighter program is that it exists, and that more than one design may be under consideration.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Часть 3! #2390084
    Witcha
    Participant

    Yes FM1 is pretty much the standard for any upgrade of existing fleet or new types , from what I have read it does not need any changes in air intake and adds 1T more thrust ( ~ 13T )

    Hmm… would it be possible to implement that on the Super-30 upgrade?:dev2:

    On a different note, are there any plans for a replacement for the old A-50 AWACS? I should have thought the A-50EI deal would have tempted the Russians to develop an AESA radar-based system of their own…

    in reply to: Indian Space & Missile Discussion II #1801166
    Witcha
    Participant

    The Akash can hit much lower than that..

    Clarification? It’s not much ground for skepticism, but I would like to hear from a source that Akash is designed for sea-skimming targets. Speaking of which, are Rajendra and CAR proficient at detecting the same?

    in reply to: MRA4 dying a slow death? #2390438
    Witcha
    Participant

    They should have gone with the Airbus A319 MPA that was proposed for the Indian navy’s tender instead.

    in reply to: Russian Aviation News – Часть 3! #2390543
    Witcha
    Participant

    That’s what the reports say about the upgrade elements.

    Links would be appreciated.

    Avionics and missile upgrades are mostly the stuff promoted by past export orders like the Su-30: Zhuk-Ph slotted-waveguide radar, Kh-29/31/35, KAB-500/1500 PGMs etc.

    in reply to: Indian Space & Missile Discussion II #1801187
    Witcha
    Participant

    I believe imported target drones have also been used to validate Akash missile system. Having said this IIRC till late nineties the lakshya’s minimum height of flight was around 100m

    It’s possible. From what I’ve read about it the Lakshya is a fairly basic targeting drone used for general testing. Anyway, the Akash official site advertises it as being effective for targets upto 600m/s, which is a little below Mach 2. At the least it will be a suitable replacement for the old SA-6.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force – News And Discussion #14 #2390874
    Witcha
    Participant

    Trident

    Hardly anyone who actually ordered C-17s use them for transporting tanks.

    Even within India it would be more efficient to just use the extensive rail network.

    Like Trident pointed out, using that argument cargo aircraft would be unnecessary, which they clearly aren’t to the IAF. Given the extremely limited road and rail infrastructure along the mountainous border areas airlift is the only way to get tanks and artillery to most forward positions in a reasonable timeframe.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News From Around The World – VI #2391057
    Witcha
    Participant

    IAF’s Surya Kirans to soon fly Hawks

    IAF’s formation aerobatic team Surya Kirans have taken the first step to switch from the present Kiran MkII aircraft to the ‘Hawks’ Advanced Jet Trainers (AJT) that the Air Force acquired three years ago. “We have initiated the process of changing to the Hawks and we have already tried our hands on these aircraft,” a senior Surya Kirans officer said here. “The team will take another couple of years or more to completely shift to the Hawks aircraft,” he said.

    The Kiran MkII or HJT-16, an indigenous twin-seater trainer, will be with the Surya Kirans for another five years before which the Hawks would be inducted into the team.

    The nine-aircraft Surya Kirans is one of the three such teams in the world alongside the Royal Air Force’s and Canadian Air Force’s. It has completed 14 years of existence and was conferred with the status of an IAF fighter squadron in May 2006.
    Full Story

    So where does that put the HJT-36 trainer that was intended to replace the Kiran?

    in reply to: Indian Air Force – News And Discussion #14 #2391070
    Witcha
    Participant

    The Il-76 has and can carry the IAF’s T-72 Ajeya tanks. With similiar dimensions but slightly heavier weight, the T-90s may fit in as well. But it is a very tight fit and from IAF experience, not something done with any ease or quickly.

    Actually, it can’t carry the T-90; that’s one of the reasons the C-17 was ordered. It’s cargo bay is only around 2.8m wide(which was barely enough for the T-72) but the T-90S is over 3m wide.

    but wasn’t the IAF suposed to place a follow on order of 3 phalcons? why 2 then??

    A few years ago the talk was about four. I’m guessing it’s the usual government penny-pinching, where they ask the IAF for their bare-minimum requirements and give them something even below that number. Or it may be due to the indigenous AWACS program proceeding on track.

    in reply to: Indian Space & Missile Discussion II #1801190
    Witcha
    Participant

    User trials to verify the consistency in performance of the total weapon system against low flying near range target, long range high altitude target, crossing and approaching target and ripple firing of two missiles from the same launcher against a low altitude receding target were conducted at ITR, Chandipur during Dec 2007. Akash missile successfully intercepted nine targets in successive launches. Fifth and last trial successfully took place at 2.15pm on 21st Dec at Chandipur on sea in which the Akash missile destroyed an Unmanned Air Vehicle (Lakshya) which was flying a path simulating an air attack.

    http://www.akashsam.com/about.htm

    Lakshya is a subsonic targeting drone. Also from that report I’m not convinced that it was flown simulating cruise-missile trajectories and not just low-flying aircraft.

Viewing 15 posts - 841 through 855 (of 1,232 total)