dark light
Airliner World
Combat Aircraft
AeroPlane
Flypast
Airforces
Aviation
Pcpilot
Air

Srbin

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,261 through 1,275 (of 1,678 total)
1 2 3 … 84 85 86 … 110 111 112
  • Author
    Posts
  • April 22, 2004 at 1:08 pm in reply to: JSF-F-35 and the Future #2696758
    Srbin
    Participant

    I kinda thought it was a Cold War Relic because it was designed to be “stealthy” or low observable, which made them in someway give up performance.

    I don’t think USAF needed an all stealthy force especially in the War on Terror.

    April 22, 2004 at 1:59 am in reply to: JSF-F-35 and the Future #2696822
    Srbin
    Participant

    35-40? I’d say way more than 70mn would be the correct price.

    Maybe around 45-50mn for USA only but for others way more + all the goodies.

    April 22, 2004 at 1:52 am in reply to: How much do the Russians know about USAF aircraft? #2696823
    Srbin
    Participant

    Originally posted by SerbPVO
    The “invisible” F-117 shot down over Serbia in 1999 most likely went to Russia .

    It did, so did parts go to China.

    April 21, 2004 at 11:10 pm in reply to: anti-tamper technology for the JSF- costs $1 billion extra #2696835
    Srbin
    Participant

    Originally posted by ELP
    IMHO FB-22 will require R&D funding we don’t have at the moment. Too bad we had C-130Js forced down our throat. Might have been enough margin there to deal with it.

    JSF IMHO is over rated. You have team players that don’t need it’s stealth ability for doing strike and could better be served by a EF2000 or Rafale or Gripen and some who could use JSF. That is a lot of range of diversity, of mission needs by the JSF partners where some just don’t have the threat level and are better served by conventional “legacy” designs, and if they suddenly did need a striker, An A-45 class of UCAV would better serve some.

    Like I said, I wouldn’t miss it if JSF gets cancelled. Again, spend a $110- $120 Bil to bring F-22 up to 500 air frames and reduce significantly total USAF shooter air frames. ( Yes there will be an A-10 for a long time and yes there will be Guard F-16s for a long time ). I just don’t see the great benefit of spending $250 Billion + / – for an airframe like JSF, and I think bleeding L.O. tech to foreign sales is a dumb idea for us.

    I think JSF is a little overrated too in some ways but cancelling it now would screw it your Allies, their money would be lost unless you returned them. Remember F-35 would be exported all the way around.

    F-22 is far by way too expensive, if anything FB-22 should be developed and orders for F-22 should be reduced down to 50(some trying to completely cancell it) and F-35 orders should be reduced a bit, by some 200 frames.

    This would save some significant money for FB-22 R&D.

    April 21, 2004 at 10:00 pm in reply to: Future Australian Aircraft Acquisitions #2696840
    Srbin
    Participant

    Ja, I think Australia should buy F-18E/F is because:

    1)The support for Hornets is mostly there, some little changing and F-18E/F should not be hard or expensive at all to integrate
    2)It can enter service some 5-8 years earlier than F-35 would
    3)Should be significantly cheaper
    4)F-18E/F I think has bigger range than F-35, not only that but Australia will also have Tankers. In capabilities, F-18E/F will already carry pretty much exactly the same weapons and undoubtly it’s Maritime Capabilities are already there, which is doubtful about F-35 as it seems. Besides why wouldn’t the F-18E/F be able to handle those Indonesian/Malaysian Flanker? I mean it’s RCS is smaller and should detect the Flankers way before the Flanker detects it.

    I don’t see why F-18E/F shouldn’t be bought. Sure it’s speeds and other things are a little lousy but I think it’s a good plane after all.

    April 21, 2004 at 9:54 pm in reply to: X-45 also planned for A2A fights?? or just bombing… #2696842
    Srbin
    Participant

    I am not really sure if any UAV’s situational awareness is as good as a human’s. Today’s AI is just not that great.

    Maybe in some 30-50 years.

    April 21, 2004 at 9:52 pm in reply to: create an airforce scenario #3 #2696843
    Srbin
    Participant

    Main:

    -Russian Option: Mig-29M1/M2 Fulcrum(AA, Anti-Shipping, Strike, Recoinassance, etc)(K/KUB Carrier Compatable) + Su-39 Frogfoot(CAS, Strike, etc) + Yak-130(Advanced Training, Helicopter Hunting, Light CAS/Strike, etc)
    OR
    American Option: F/A-18C/D Hornet(AA, Anti-Shipping, Strike, Recoinassance, etc)(Carrier Compatable) + AV-8B Harrier II(Limited Air Defense/Anti-Shipping, CAS, Strike, etc)(Carrier Compatable) + T/A-50 Golden Eagle(Advanced Training, Helicopter Hunting, Light CAS/Strike, etc)

    -C-130 Variants(AWACS, Cargo, Transport, Patrol, SAR, Airlift, Tankage, etc)

    -An-124 Condor(Strategic Heavy Cargo/Transport, etc)

    -SH-60F Seahawk(ASW, Cargo, etc)(on Ships)

    -H-60 Black Hawk & Other Variants(Utility, Cargo, etc)

    -Super Tucano/ALX(Basic Training, COIN, Helicopter Hunting, Patrol, etc)

    -AH-6J Little Bird(CAS/Anti Tank, Observation, Recoinassance, COIN, etc)
    OR
    BO 105/PAH-1(CAS/Anti Tank, Observation, Recoinassance, SAR, Transport, COIN, etc)

    Optional/Secondary:

    -SAMs are secondary
    S-400(Long range SAM)
    Any other Medium/Short Ranged SAM
    -Heavy/Medium Attack Helicopters are an option
    Ka-52/Tiger/A-129/Mi-28N/Attack Versions of H-60(CAS/Anti-Tank, etc)
    -If a Carrier available
    E-2C 2000 Hawkeye AWACS
    +
    S-3B Viking(ASW, Anti-Shipping, Transport, Tankage, etc)
    -A more expensive option
    Russian: Su-37 Super Flanker(instead of Mig-29M1/M2 Fulcrum), Su-33 Naval Flanker(instead of Mig-29K/KUB Fulcrum for Carrier use)
    OR
    American: F-14D Tomcat(instead of F-18C/D Hornet for Carrier & Land use)

    April 21, 2004 at 7:39 pm in reply to: which is cheaper, Mirage 2000Mk5 or Gripen? #2696867
    Srbin
    Participant

    Well what do you guys think about Mig-29M1/M2 vs Mig-29SMT.

    April 21, 2004 at 7:20 pm in reply to: Future Australian Aircraft Acquisitions #2696870
    Srbin
    Participant

    1)The question is can Australia’s F-18s really last till 2015 when the F-35 would be available? It seems F-111s have no chance of staying in service for that long
    2)Besides that the F-18E/F can be delivered like 5-8 years earlier than F-35 and will be significantly cheaper, what significant advantage will the F-35 hold over F-18E/F besides it being stealthier?
    3)Australia has a pretty limited budget and in the future tons of things will need to be replaced, would they have the money to buy so many F-35s which won’t be available till 2015 to Australia?

    April 21, 2004 at 2:24 am in reply to: anti-tamper technology for the JSF- costs $1 billion extra #2696988
    Srbin
    Participant

    This is a JOINT Strike Fighter, why would you reduce the JSF orders, that would screw up it’s costs even more.

    If anything the F-22 would be a deep strike but it would need some modifying to carry other weapons, I mean it’s internal bays are smaller than F-35’s(although there are more of them)so it is limited to some weapons. That is why USAF needs FB-22 to replace F-15Es because F-35s just cannot do deep strike.

    Besides why does USAF need some 300++ F-22’s? Not like 50 F-22s cannot wipe out any AF in the World.

    I say keep the JSF orders or maybe reduce them a bit but not a lot, heavily reduce F-22 orders down to 50-100 and develop the FB-22.

    April 21, 2004 at 2:18 am in reply to: Future Australian Aircraft Acquisitions #2696991
    Srbin
    Participant

    But doesn’t the Rafale and Typhoon have a better/similar range to the F-18E/F already?

    I think the Super Hornet would be a better choice for Australia because it already has an AESA, JDAM and bunch of other weapons integrated yet the full multirole Rafale is not out yet, but the best part is that the support and infrastructure for the Hornets is there and it would be much cheaper to get the SH than Rafale or Typhoon.

    Don’t forget Australia will buy new tankers too.

    Overall to me, logically the SH is a better choice.

    April 20, 2004 at 10:30 pm in reply to: Indonesia: 8 more Flankers #2697003
    Srbin
    Participant

    Originally posted by milavia
    Love that camo!

    yah me too

    April 20, 2004 at 10:29 pm in reply to: Future Australian Aircraft Acquisitions #2697004
    Srbin
    Participant

    Is it possible for Super Hornet to replace F-111s too? I mean it’s payload and range is nowhere near of F-111’s but with PGMs and other things and plus the tankers Australia will purchase to extend the range, wouldn’t it make it possible for SH to replace F-111?

    Also is there a chance Australia might go for Typhoon or Rafale considering their latest purchases in Europe?

    April 20, 2004 at 8:47 pm in reply to: Indonesia: 8 more Flankers #2697020
    Srbin
    Participant

    God I think I am starting to get into the whole Flanker mania:D

    April 20, 2004 at 8:31 pm in reply to: A-10s to be given standoff upgrades, to be in service until 2018 #2697025
    Srbin
    Participant

    As for those UCAV’s, how would they have the situational awareness of a pilot? Sure they could drop bombs on fixed targets but how about moving targets and other things?

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1,261 through 1,275 (of 1,678 total)
1 2 3 … 84 85 86 … 110 111 112