dark light

contrailjj

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 826 through 840 (of 1,053 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2575597
    contrailjj
    Participant

    BUT!!… drum roll please…. this one should be THE one…

    http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1967

    Being the home of CF air transport, Trenton is THE place to make the announcement…. I’m giggling like a little girl again… fingers crossed there might be a ’17 there as a backdrop for the Minister’s announcement.

    in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2575630
    contrailjj
    Participant

    well, that was a bit of a let down… simply a project annoucement for the helos… not expected in service foranother three years, no contract awarded yet.

    http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1966

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/06/27/1656031-cp.html

    in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2575704
    contrailjj
    Participant

    Well, it looks like we’ll know in an hour’s time… media lock-down has just occurred at the LTF – Edmonton Garrison… project announcement at 13:00 (local)

    in reply to: London Science Museum – Aviation #1318120
    contrailjj
    Participant

    It’s actually from an A340 (in the entrance to the museum, I think)

    (Edit. Ahh, just seen the caption. Skim-reading at work again)

    OOPs… my bad – must… learn… read… words

    contrailjj
    Participant

    speaking to the original question… generally yes… so long as steps have been taken to mask/divert the radar signature inherent in some metalic items one cannot do without… ie: propulsion unit et al.

    Andy makes a very good point regarding the absorbtion of the radar energy, as ideally, no return would be the best. The ‘ideal’ stealth aircraft would be completely transparent to radar (and the eye if I dare)… to the point of emulating, modulating and then re-broadcasting said radar energy beyond the aircraft… creating a seamless, ‘non-target’ image on the radar screen. Such concepts were dealt with in the late 30’s/early 40s with regard to visual detection (including physical illumination of airframes) and much of that data provided background for what is known today as counter-shading in the application of camouflage.

    In addition, it should be noted that the RAM coating of the F-117 (if I recall correctly) is highly metallic… and it is the suspended metalic particles in that coating that serve the same purpose as the ‘trianglular’ structures within say the leading edges of the SR-71… providing ‘interference’ to the incoming radar energy, dispersing/absorbing the energy and thus reducing the received ‘return’. Aircraft such as the B-2 utilize the ‘blended-shape’ concept to deflect/disperse the radar energy away from the airframe. Even in this case extensive use of RAM and the angular attributes of the F-117 are still utilized.

    All said and done, it come back to the desire to create the invisible hole in the sky.

    JJ

    in reply to: What is 'Pave' #2576112
    contrailjj
    Participant

    I knew a former CF SAR pilot (fixed wing) who referred to helos as ‘hysterical palm trees’… not quite the same ‘ring’ or ‘feel’ the the name, but humourous nonetheless.

    JJ

    in reply to: London Science Museum – Aviation #1318909
    contrailjj
    Participant

    WOW!.. I had no idea… not sure which got me drooling more… the Kestrel or the Vulcan U/C…

    I HAVE to start planning my next UK visit soon.

    JJ

    in reply to: Força Aéra Portuguesa museum – Sintra site #1318915
    contrailjj
    Participant

    a beautiful collection! IPMSers take note… the Asas T-37 ‘diorama’ is waiting to be modelled… capturing all elements of service and maintenance.. simply gorgeous!

    JJ

    in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2576223
    contrailjj
    Participant

    The strategic airlifter and large helo (I still haven’t seen a pricetag on the helos) package also includes a 20 year maintenance and repair contract (in the US). The C-17 price surprised me, it actually seems lower that what I would have estimated – but then again – someone is also making a killing on the maintenance.

    The Herc replacement may very well be a complete replacement – ours are certainly getting long in the tooth and several are no longer airworthy. And included in there as well would most likely be the CC-115 Buffalo and Twin Otter replacements

    Bear in mind that those prices quoted are all Canadian Funds (approx .90 USD)…

    and the trucks… well, the government still has to appease a certain socio-political entity at home which will not be prospering from the aviation contracts

    JJ

    in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2576473
    contrailjj
    Participant

    hey, can you blame them, we DO need our coffee… Tim’s on base at home (or right down the street), onboard the fleet and even in Kandahar… surely the most Canadian, non-Canadian icon in existence

    just an aside… when Wendy’s spun-off Timmy’s, I believe the IPO was $28 – it hit 38 inside of a week… get yourself a franchise or two and you too could be buying C-17s

    in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2576558
    contrailjj
    Participant

    I know the feeling… I see the occassional Cormorant passing by on this end of the St. Lawrence. Best view I had was at the Trenton show in 03… they had one on static for everyone to climb through and then put her into the flying display… just as the good old Lab did her final bow and turned the Cormorant made a high-speed run-in from the left ‘chaing’ the Lab off the scene. She’s an impressive flyer… keep your eyes peeled for the Children’s program ‘Mighty Machines’… they have a half hour segment which includes some really good ‘demo’ footage, over Halifax Harbour with the Coast Guard and some over-land SAR exercising outside Trenton.

    PS… when’s the London Show? I miss the ‘good old days’

    contrailjj
    Participant

    spot on I think… here’s one from FIDAE ’04

    http://www.spotter.com.br/fidae2004/fidae2004_111.JPG

    And here’s a twist… although I could probably post it on the ‘but it didn’t fly for this/that…. thread…. Still looks pretty neat

    James

    in reply to: Pointless Quiz is BACK! #1320320
    contrailjj
    Participant

    I’ve gotta toss my 2 cents in… I’ll go waaayyyy out on a limb here… XP-54 Swoose Goose

    in reply to: Battle of Britain county. #1321268
    contrailjj
    Participant

    stunning shots and a beautiful tribute… I believe I’ve found my next UK destination…. did someone mention pubs?? when/how/where can I schedule sunshine like that? (sorry… past expeditions have been in the northwest and I think I saw about 5 hours of sunlight over a total of 4 weeks)

    JJ

    in reply to: Canadian C-17s #2577530
    contrailjj
    Participant

    Pale’ my man, no worries there… ‘blame Canada’ I’ll sing along… happy ‘joshing about’ within the Realm is encouraged… remember, I’m still in envy of the Roos for having the ‘Pigs’. Someday, oh yes someday, our old (and I mean 40+ years old) SeaKings will finally get their day of rest.

    we’re finally getting somewhere, while it may be a minority, the new Conservative party government will have (IMHO) achieved more by the end of this coming week than their predecessors did in 12 years. I’ve been a whole-hearted supporter of our ‘Forces’ for ages and its finally nice to see long neglected needs addressed – and I’m not about to cry foul over what priorities are getting served first.

    The lead-up to this is killing me…

    http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2006/06/25/1652765-cp.html

    “Later in the week, the Conservatives will outline plans to spend $3 billion on four strategic lift aircraft – also meant to shuttle troops and equipment overseas in a hurry. A Senate committee recommended Ottawa purchase six to eight high-lift planes.

    Ottawa will also set aside an additional $4.6 billion for tactical lift planes to replace aging Hercules transports, and

    there are plans to announce $1.1 billion in spending on military trucks in Quebec.

    The prime minister is expected to be in Edmonton on Wednesday, where requirements for 15 new tactical helicopters, possibly Chinooks, will be released.

    The $4.6 billion purchase would give Canadian troops, primarily in Afghanistan, the ability to move around the battlefield. More importantly, it would allow them to be resupplied from the air, instead of the ground where convoys face the deadly prospect of roadside bombs.

    But the question in military circles is how those unarmed transport helicopters will be protected in combat zones, such as Afghanistan, where aircraft face the threat of rocket propelled grenade attacks from insurgents on the ground.

    The air force will eventually need to either arm existing rotary aircraft or purchase attack helicopter, a senior military officer said in a background briefing.

    “It’s a capability we’re going to have to address,” said the high-ranking officer in Afghanistan, who asked not to be identified.

    “On landing the (transport) choppers can be fired on with (rocket propelled grenades for example.”

    Canadians troops currently hitch rides on helicopters belonging to other coalition countries and those aircraft rarely leave Kandahar without an attack helicopter escort, usually U.S. Apache gunships.

    One stop-gap measure being considered by military planners is to arm a handful of existing army utility helicopters until bona fide attack helicopters can be purchased. “

    I’m personally intrigued by the reference to attack helicopters… could be something interesting in the offing over then couple years… hmmm, certainly would have been a bit of a priority if I had some control… but its starting to look like we have some direction regarding roles and tasking, and about time too.

    The same article refers to funding for 3 new resupply ships for the Navy. Still no specifics regarding a RO-RO/Amphib assault vessel and landing craft.

    James

Viewing 15 posts - 826 through 840 (of 1,053 total)