your right sferrin
the USA needs basic ass and trash haulers.
but want planes out of science fiction or halo troop ships
too much xbox and playstation 3 and too much money to waste.
ukraine an 70 is one option
Ukraine’s NATO bid to be discussed during Bush’s visit
KIEV, March 13 (RIA Novosti) – Ukraine’s president said on Thursday that his country’s moves toward membership of NATO would be discussed during U.S. President George W. Bush’s visit in late March.
Viktor Yushchenko was quoted by his press office as saying after talks with European Union leaders in Brussels that the Membership Action Plan that paves the way for membership in the military bloc would be discussed with Bush in Kiev.
The visit by the U.S. president will take place on March 31-April 1, ahead of a NATO summit in Romania in April.
Yushchenko said he was positive the NATO summit would back the Ukrainian leaders’ request to allow the ex-Soviet state to join the action plan.
“I am positive we will realize our desire to join the Membership Action Plan,” he said.
In January, Ukraine’s pro-Western president, prime minister and parliamentary speaker sent a letter to the alliance’s Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer saying they hoped that the country could join the plan.
Northrop takes tailless approach to future airlifter
Northrop takes tailless approach to future airlifter
Northrop is proposing a tailless flying wing with powered-lift system for AFRL’s Speed Agile technology demonstration to refine the concept of a STOL transport to replace the C-130 towards the end of next decade. AFRL is looking for a design able to combine a take-off distance under 2,000ft with a cruise speed over Mach 0.8 – while carrying a 30t payload.
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/graham-warwick/2007/12/northrop-takes-tailless-approa.html
was there any options on the order of super hornets??????
it might be a good thing to order a heap of single seaters
instead of center rebarrelling the legacy hornets.
and to head off delays in the F-35
the problem with the herc is its weights it can
carry and the size of the fuselage.
the a-400m will come along a scope up orders
with its heavier loads and bigger fuselage.
the US needs a larger aircraft between herc and C-17.
maybe
The An70 is a powerful prop-driven aircraft. While the C-130 can haul 20 tons, and the A400M 37 tons, the AN-70 can carry 47 tons (for up to 1,350 kilometers.) Carrying 20 tons, the An70 can travel 7,400 kilometers. The aircraft also excels in one area the Russians were always good at; the ability to operate from unpaved, and short, runways. The Russian-Ukrainian company developing the AN-70 expected to sell lots of them to countries like India and China, and others that want the most for their money in a rugged military transport.
true
just seems the f-100s are a little small thats all
t-50 or a-50 great choice
amx needed more powerful motor
but both would be great
Comparison of the DDG-51 and DD(X) Destroyers
Procurement Cost for the Lead Ship of the Class
(Billions of 2007 dollars)
Navy’s estimate 2.6————–3.3
CBO’s estimate 2.6—————4.7
Displacement (Thousands of long tons)
Light load 6.6——————-12.1
Full load 8.3———————14.3
Procurement Cost per Thousand Long Tons for the
Lead Ship of the Class (Millions of 2007 dollars)
Navy’s estimate 385————–275
CBO’s estimate 385————–385
a
Annual Operating Costs per Ship (Millions of 2007 dollars) 34 22 to 32
Life-Cycle Costs per Ship (Billions of 2007 dollars)b
Using the Navy’s estimate for DD(X) procurement 2.1 2.7 to 2.9
Using CBO’s estimate for DD(X) procurement 2.1 3.8 to 4.0
Source: Congressional Budget Office.
a. This number is the same as CBO’s estimate for the DDG-51 because it is based on a direct analogy to
that ship.
b. Life-cycle costs are shown on a discounted (net-present-value) basis.
that envisioned a fleet of 260 to 325 ships, including eight to 12 DD(X)s. The
program of record submitted with the President’s 2006 budget included 10
DD(X)s, pending the Navy’s determination of the composition of its future fleet.
According to that program, the lead ship of the DD(X) class would be procured in
2007.
Comparing Construction Costs
for the DDG-51 and DD(X)
Comparing the cost of the lead ship of the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke class with the
cost of the lead DD(X) depends critically on the inflator used to convert 1985 dollars
to 2007 dollars. According to information in Department of Defense (DoD)
cost reports, the lead ship of the DDG-51 class, begun in 1985, cost approximately
$1.2 billion to build. Using DoD’s inflator for overall military procurement
to convert that amount to 2007 dollars results in a cost of $2.0 billion to
construct the first DDG-51. However, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Research, Development, and Acquisition, John Young, has stated that if the first
DDG-51 were bought now, it would cost $2.4 billion (20 percent more than
DoD’s overall procurement inflator would indicate).2
According to analysis of the inflationary component of past cost increases in
shipbuilding programs that was conducted by the Navy and shared with CBO,
DoD’s overall procurement inflator underestimates the inflation that has actually
occurred in the naval shipbuilding industry. On the basis of that analysis, the
Navy provided CBO with a composite inflator that reflects the growth in labor
and material costs that the naval shipbuilding industry has experienced in the past
and expects to experience through 2011. Using that inflator, CBO calculates that
the lead DDG-51 cost almost $2.6 billion in 2007 dollars (see Table 1).
According to the latest information available to CBO, the Navy estimates that the
lead ship of the DD(X) program would cost $3.3 billion. (Information provided
by the Navy suggests that the service’s estimate of that cost grew by about 25 percent
between the President’s 2004 and 2006 budgets.) Using the Navy’s current
estimate for the lead ship and historical relationships about how the cost per ship
declines as more are built, CBO estimates that the DD(X) would cost an average
of $2.4 billion apiece for a 10-ship program.
However, recent press reports indicate that the Cost Analysis Improvement Group
(CAIG) in the Office of the Secretary of Defense believes that procurement costs
for the DD(X) program may be 33 percent higher than the Navy estimates.3 If
those reports are accurate, the first DD(X) could cost a total of $4.4 billion,
implying an average cost of $3.2 billion for a 10-ship program. (As shown in
Table 2, the Navy’s cost goals and estimates for the DD(X) program and its predecessor,
the DD-21, have increased several times since 1996.)
CBO employed a top-level approach to bound the potential cost of the lead
DD(X). (Our experience indicates that such an approach can provide a good
indication of a program’s possible costs.) CBO calculated a metric of cost per
long tons, measured in terms of a ship’s light-load displacement (when carrying
no fuel, crew, cargo, or water), based on the lead DDG-51. That first DDG-51
weighed 6,624 long tons and cost a total of $2.6 billion in 2007 dollars, or $385
million per thousand tons. The Navy now expects the DD(X) to have a light-load
the rest is here to read
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/65xx/doc6561/07-19-NavyDDX.pdf
small minority
wouldnt be people from other countries would it???????????
Every nation in the world has some sort of defence force
Why attack the service people they should change politics
and politicians.
Service men and women are just doing their job
i would like to see the final prtoduct or australianized F-100
it supposed to be inline with series II type which is suppose
to be different to the F-100.
also heard F-105 should be very similar in outlay.
Tiddles and Jezza, thanks for your replys. They must have cut me out somehow. Never mind. I wonder who they are insulting now! Are there any other Aussie Defence Forums around?
carlo kopp is copping a floggin
About time…………….Yet, I don’t see the Super Hornet contract being cancelled!:rolleyes:
that desicion will be in may
either way wait and see
stupid choice in first place
This is mainly addressed to any Aussies on this board. What happened to The Fifth Column? Has it died?
yeah still going
i think its great they are waving to you
sweet shots
2 seat so they can take up people for JOY flights:D 😀 😀
i think most super hornets are 2 seaters any way
but its pr for VIPs and others to try it out