dark light

Yama

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 599 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russian Navy Thread 2. #2022864
    Yama
    Participant

    Last thing Russians need is yet another frigate class. But maybe they would be interested in Type 071 if Mistral deal is cancelled.

    Yama
    Participant

    But I’ve noticed a worrying trend for people from other countries, where metric measurements are supposedly the norm, to talk about such confusing things as aircraft flying at n thousand feet, at x miles per hour, at aircraft weighing y pounds, at aircraft engines having z thousand pounds thrust, & so on. I see it on this forum. I don’t like it, but what can I do?

    Most of the aviation world uses feet, pounds and nautical miles – a historical millstone largely due to result of WW2. So for many it’s convenient to use those units.
    Finnish Air Force was completely metric until late ’90s when they converted to feet & nautical miles.

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread 2. #2022946
    Yama
    Participant

    China Eyes Type 054A Frigate Sale To Russia

    That sounds, eh, somewhat speculative and quite unlikely…

    Yama
    Participant

    Official prices, even Gripen C cost more.

    I’m sorry, those numbers are not even remotely comparable with each other.
    If it was obviously cheapest, shouldn’t it be winning export orders left and right – instead they only scored an order with Australia which was hugely controversial because of high costs.

    Yama
    Participant

    Cheapest to buy (don’t forget to include cumulative interest on debt into operational costs) and when an engine fails it doesn’t crash into the Alps.

    Cheapest according to whom?

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread 2. #2022993
    Yama
    Participant

    Besides, one has to consider what IN wanted: a gap-filler, that could be fitted with a suite of weapons and electromics very similar to that of P17. I think, but this is my opinion, it would have been far more expensive to modify 11540 to that requirement than to modify 1135.1. And the Krivak series was a mature and proven design to begin with, with 40 units completed (versus a single 11540)

    I’ve understood that originally it was pr.1166 which was going to India, but they were unhappy with it and cancelled the order (and the ships were either scrapped or completed for Russia). 11356 was conceived to meet their updated requirements: since neither 1135 nor 1154 were in the configuration Indians wanted, a major redesign was needed in any case and it was probably all the same which hull the new weapons and sensors were bolted on.

    Talking about 1154’s, any word on Tuman? Couple of years ago there was a report she would be completed, but recent pics don’t show any activity. Offering it to export seems fairly hopeless as probably not that many navies are interested in buying a single unique ship.

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread 2. #2023270
    Yama
    Participant

    A question to what they know:
    Why frigates produced after the fall of the Soviet Union (Talwar) are based on the modernization of project 1135 and non of the most new project 11540?
    Thanks

    1135 is Severnaya design, is 1154 from different bureau? Maybe Indians just chose a cheaper builder and the design just came along.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 14 #2208492
    Yama
    Participant

    Errrr… Peru…? Argentina…? who else?

    Mexico, obviously. Didn’t they actually study Su-30 acquisition at some point? Also one of the few countries in the region which might actually both afford the a/c, and has a requirement for it.

    in reply to: Dassault Rafale, News & Discussion (XV) #2210048
    Yama
    Participant

    I believe I read somewhere that L&T will tie up with Areva. Here is one article (although not the one I had read):

    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/pm-narendra-modis-france-visit-sees-arevas-nuclear-plant-agreement-with-npcil-lt/articleshow/46883874.cms

    Plz stay away from Areva. They give new meaning to the phrase ‘nuclear disaster’.

    in reply to: Dassault Rafale, News & Discussion (XV) #2211309
    Yama
    Participant

    Read my earlier posts. You’re repeating my points.

    Oh sorry, I was not disagreeing with you, just clarifying the points you had made.

    Regarding prospects of F-18 in Indian service, lets not forget that production of the basic F-18 ended in 2000, and Super Hornet weights over four tons more than Rafale M which already was quite marginal for Clemenceau class.

    in reply to: Dassault Rafale, News & Discussion (XV) #2212949
    Yama
    Participant

    The little I’ve seen suggests that the cost for refitting Sao Paulo was modest, & the purchase price was reported as $12 mn, which is trivial, scrap value. She was operational (but limited) immediately, but seems to have suffered from inadequate repairs & maintenance, starting with her 2005 refit. It’s hard to say what it would have cost to refit & extend her life properly, but I doubt it’d be anywhere near the cost of rebuilding Gorshkov. Smaller ship, though.

    Modifying her to operate Rafales properly is unknown.

    Clemenceaus were/are small ships, roughly same size (or even smaller) than old Essex class. The small size was constant handicap in French attempts to replace Crusader/Etendard, which is one reason why they were never replaced until CdG came along. Even then, Crusader needed to be modified to be able to operate from them. Also, those ships were heavily worked, since often they were only things available when enemies of le Tricolore needed bombing. Which is why, I suspect, Brazil has such problems with Sao Paulo – the ship is worn out and the modest facelift it got is not nearly enough to get it back to front lines.

    As for the planes: SuE, A-4, A-7 and Harrier would have been able to operate off her, all which were long out of production and available airframes were very old and scarce. Rafale and Hornet could have, with modifications, but with limited payload probably no different to a STOBAR carrier. So instead of an old carrier with limited airwing, we would be looking at even older carrier with even less capable airwing…not exactly a dream deal if you ask me.

    in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon Discussion and News 2014 #2213383
    Yama
    Participant

    That sounds similar to “no way the first cellphone by Apple was going to overcome 15 yrs head start in development and operational use of companies like Nokia, Motorola or Alcatel”.

    Well it didn’t – but they had a huge head start in marketing 🙂

    And in fact, Apple has never produced a single phone, their production is all outsourced and I believe hardware design is too…so it’s not quite comparable although I partly agree with your sentiment.

    in reply to: Best subsonic fighter of the 50's #2215116
    Yama
    Participant

    Gnat all the way – the only down side perhaps being that the very compact structure brought many maintenance troubles.

    Finns evaluated both Hunter and Gnat, and thought that Hunter didn’t have a chance – not only Gnat had much superior performance, it costed only half of Hunter.

    in reply to: How they can anti-submarine ? #2024124
    Yama
    Participant

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]235734[/ATTACH]

    There are several charts about relative submarine noise levels, some of them based on USN information which was (supposedly) accidentally released.

    in reply to: Which is tougher A10 or Su-25 (genuine question)? #2218288
    Yama
    Participant

    I personally have never understood the fuss about the GAU-8/A. People get carried away by its enormous proportions completely forgeting that sheer size and weight are negative parameters, not positive. IMO, this cannon is way too heavy, too complex and too maintenance intensive for what it delivers.

    I couldn’t agree more. A-10 has many design features which are very smart and show that lots of thought went into designing the plane for the role – however, the gun which everyone always keeps gushing about is actually one of the weak points of the entire system. Maybe, maybe if the plane had been doing only anti-tank mission it might have been worth the weight & bulk, but in actual use, nope.

    A-10 would have been a better plane if it had just the Su-25’s Gast gun, or European-style twin 30mm revolver guns.

Viewing 15 posts - 436 through 450 (of 599 total)