Page 12 – Key Publishing

Y-20 Bacon

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 1,779 total)

← 1 2 3 … 11 12 13 … 117 118 119 →

Author

Posts
March 3, 2017 at 6:43 am in reply to: Build an air force using only jets produced in Asia. #2151559

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Fixed wing:
fighter 50 x Mitsubishi F-15J
fighter 10 x Mitsubishi F-15DJ
fighter 30 x Mitsubishi F-2
fighter 10 x AIDC F-CK-1C
multirole 30 x HAL Tejas
ground attack 30 x KAI A-50
ground attack 20 x IPTN AC-235 gunship

trainer 15 x SME Aero Tiga
trainer 15 x Kawasaki T-2
trainer 15 x HAL HJT-36 Sitara

transport 40 x Kawasaki T-2
transport 60 x IPTN CN-235
transport 30 x NAL Saras
transport VIP 5 x Honda Jet

patrol / asw 30 x Kawasaki P-1
patrol / asw 50 x IPTN CN-235 MPA
EW operations 14 x Kawasaki EC-1
long range SAR 18 x Shin Meiwa US-2

experimental 1 x Mitsubishi X-2 Shinshin

Helicopters:
attack 50 x HAL Light Combat Helicopter
light attack 40 x HAL Rudra
observation 30 x Kawasaki OH-1
transport 60 x KAI KUH-1 Surion
transport 80 x HAL Dhruv
transport VIP 10x Mitsubishi MH2000
asw 30 x Mitsubishi SH-60K
sar 30 x Dhruv (CFW)

thats a lot of love for Japanese aircraft.
Not sure if F-15s from mitsubishi would count. if it did, then surely HAL Flankers, mitsubishi f-35s, and other license built aircraft should be included no.

March 2, 2017 at 1:24 am in reply to: Queen Elizabeth Class: was it right to go for F-35B over the C? #2152223

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Any chance the Japanese will build full sized aircraft carriers? CATOBAR or otherwise?

this is you

and yes

March 2, 2017 at 1:16 am in reply to: Build an air force using only jets produced in Asia. #2152224

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Looks alright, but missing AWACS.

are there any awacs aircraft produced in Asia? maybe just China?

I think the Japanese, singaporeans, and others use either American aircraft or Russian with israeli, or brazilian with israeli

March 2, 2017 at 1:14 am in reply to: Russia and UAE to develop new 5th Gen Fighter #2152241

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

its a really nice concept art. i like it a lot.
but its probably too small to carry anything internally.

all 5th gen aircraft so far are either chunky and fat (f-22, x-32, j-20, fc-31) or pancake like (y-23 or pakfa) in order to accommodate the bay.

I don’t think there can be a light fighter that is stealthy and have a bay. the japanese x-2 is close in size and weight to a gripen but doesnt have the space
f-35 might be short, but it is very heavy and big

March 1, 2017 at 12:37 pm in reply to: Russia and UAE to develop new 5th Gen Fighter #2152662

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

An excellent way to twist the facts and distort the data.. Of course, the F-22A has had absolutely nothing with the YF-22, it was a completely different aircraft, with different engines, built to different requirements and by a completely different company.. 🙂 Likewise, Sukhoi could develop the T-50 up to the pre-series examples, then rename the project to T-70, make few tweaks, build a “prototype” and then claim the first flight to IOC in 18 months 🙂

Not sure about the EAP but I would definitely use the date of the Rafale A as the Rafale’s first flight..

I think this would be a sensible approach.. An entirely new airframe powered by mature engines, with most subsystems borrowed from MiG-35, Su-35 and PAK-FA..

if its a stealthy airframe based on mig-29 guts.. i would not be surprised it ended up looking like this

March 1, 2017 at 12:32 pm in reply to: New Italian Carrier (or LHD?) Trieste #2008972

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

looks about the same size and displacement as the Cavour

whats the capacity for troops and aircraft?

the twin island design reminds me of the qec

March 1, 2017 at 12:31 pm in reply to: Queen Elizabeth Class: was it right to go for F-35B over the C? #2152667

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

since were on the subject of right choices..
was the Thales twin island design the right choice over the BAE one? what do you guys think

March 1, 2017 at 12:30 pm in reply to: Build an air force using only jets produced in Asia. #2152669

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

It depends on how much strategic reach you want.. in which case your options might only be Chinese in many cases.. like for bombers

but i like:

fighters: FC-31 or J-20. it’s your only choice for 5th gen for now, and even then, there’s a lot of unknown qualities about them. We’ve no idea if KFX or AMCA will ever materialize, or if Japan will make a bigger X-2. 4th gen wise, I like the Taiwanese Ching Kuo series. but over all the Mitsubishi F-2 is a better system with its aesa and AAM-4

trainers: T-50 and KT-1

transports: large. C-2.
maritime: P-1

helicopters:
Surion for transport
i don’t know if any Asian country produces light utility helicopters. i guess the Dhruv would count here

February 28, 2017 at 2:28 pm in reply to: If you were in charge of the JSF/F-35 program what would you have done differently? #2153141

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

I’ve heard it claimed that in fly-offs and such the DoD tends to down select to a “high risk” and “low risk” option. In the case of the JSF tech demonstrators the X-35 was the higher risk entry with more unknowns while the X-32 was lower risk since that method of achieving STOVL was already used on the Harrier.

For some reason lift jets were viewed very negatively and as a result the McD design wasn’t selected for further development.

I know the shaft-driven lift fan was LM’s pet project and they put a lot of work into it but part of me wishes McD could have been allowed to redesign their aircraft around that configuration. Perhaps more competition at a later stage, after a method of STOVL had been decided upon, would have been a good choice.

imagine had they gone the boeing route. look how fast they handled the t-x

February 27, 2017 at 1:42 pm in reply to: Queen Elizabeth Class: was it right to go for F-35B over the C? #2153481

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Izumo’s elevators shouldn’t be an issue. They plan to operate V-22 off the Izumo. The thermion coating could be applied if Japan so wished. There are no technical issues (besides a lack of a ski jump) that would limit the Izumo from operating the F-35B, other than smallish hangar. The political question makes it unlikely that either Izumo or Kaga will operate F-35’s in the near future

this is to scale, looks like you’re right. more than enough space on the center elevator, length wise.
enough width wise but a tight fit. not sure if the Osprey can go on that elevator (how wide are its folded wings)

so is a lack of a ski jump a big issue? the American LHDs don’t have ski jumps and will operate the Daves.

February 27, 2017 at 12:51 pm in reply to: If you were in charge of the JSF/F-35 program what would you have done differently? #2153521

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

If were running the show there would have been no USN JSF variant. Just USAF, USMC, and RAF/RN as the primary partners. The McDonnell Douglas design would compete against the Lockheed design in a flyoff much as what occurred with the actual Boeing X-32 and Lockheed X-35.

The Navy’s own fighter program would be focused around a larger aircraft with greater high speed, high altitude performance. Sorta like the cancelled NATF. There would be full technologies shared between the programs however, hopefully resulting in some commonality in avionics.

I really did like the McD design, i would like to know why it lost out to the other 2.

February 27, 2017 at 12:50 pm in reply to: Queen Elizabeth Class: was it right to go for F-35B over the C? #2153530

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

A large number of dependent factors to allow that to happen. All jets would have to have enough fuel to take off vertically, as well as essentially no other payload, to then land on whatever was available. If the vessel is on fire it has probably been hit by a weapon of some sort, potentially impacting the flight deck anyway. How many deck spots are available on most STOVL capable vessels, perhaps 6 on an LHD and up to ten on the QE meaning for bigger vessels you wouldn’t get much of the air group off.

The Izumo would be capable of operating STOVL aircraft with a few modifications. I would be interested to know what the elevators are rated for.

Izumo is a really beautiful ship. Hope to see a 40 or 60 ton version of it.

but I heard the deck can’t handle the f-35b blast and the elevators are too small

February 27, 2017 at 12:49 pm in reply to: PLAN News Thread #4 #2009046

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

China building third aircraft carrier, says report

http://www.janes.com/article/68236/china-building-third-aircraft-carrier-says-report

so their 2nd carrier is a kuznetsov variant, and they’ll retire the first

then the 3rd one will be a catobar..

they’re going to buy totally different set of aircrafts and operations?

February 25, 2017 at 3:29 pm in reply to: Queen Elizabeth Class: was it right to go for F-35B over the C? #2154251

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

The QE2. What do people think of the looks ? Its not doing it for me. I wouldn’t say it is ugly but it just looks kinda boxing and boring.

i like the boxy look!

but I wish it had a ski jump that looked more like the Indian/Russian style bow

since we are on that topic.. pros and cons of the Brit style and Indian/Russian style ski jump?

February 22, 2017 at 1:29 pm in reply to: Queen Elizabeth Class: was it right to go for F-35B over the C? #2155944

Y-20 Bacon
Participant

Sortie rate generation. You need a large airgroup to generate sorties at the level we require…..you need a big deck, big hangar and lots of fuel, spares, munitions and people storage space to support a large airgroup.

do you think a QEC with B’s can generate more sorties than QEC with Cs?
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 1,779 total)

← 1 2 3 … 11 12 13 … 117 118 119 →