dark light

Siddar

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 227 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The future of GiB's: The irrealistic shepherd view #2199204
    Siddar
    Participant

    I’m not sure on the value of fighters controlling drones versus a ground based operator doing it.

    AH-64 will have ability to control grey eagles and smaller shadow UAV added very soon so well get some actual information on the value of the concept.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2199213
    Siddar
    Participant

    Do you think that somehow the Adla, MN, Luftwaffe, Flygvapnet, etc, are going to buy American in the late 30´s? Forget it, not gonna happen. There will be a Western European future combat system, if it´s a manned fighter only god knows, but its going to exist.

    Will Europe spend 40 billion to develop a gen 5 aircraft while US is working on a gen 6 aircraft at the same time?

    I don’t think they are very happy with the last generation where they built gen 4 aircraft while US built gen 5 ones.

    in reply to: how will Brexit impact UK Aviation? #2200075
    Siddar
    Participant

    This thread has been far more imformitive then i expected.

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2200567
    Siddar
    Participant

    UAV mmets VR googles, Strap some weapons to these and were at the point of a whole new era of CAS,

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2201302
    Siddar
    Participant
    in reply to: how will Brexit impact UK Aviation? #2201491
    Siddar
    Participant

    The FTSE 250 is currently just below 16000. In the last three months, it’s only been at or below that level since Friday morning.

    The pound is currently at USD1.34, 138 yen, 1.21 euros. The euro has been badly affected by Brexit, like the pound, so that rate is a bad measure. Sterling is at its lowest rate against the yen for about 3 years, & against the USD for a very long time indeed.

    Why is a weak pound a bad thing for the UK? It seems it is actually a benefit to UK based manufacturing.

    Siddar
    Participant

    F35 engine basically predestines a eventual heavy western fighter with a max take off weight of 120k pounds.

    As the power of engines increase the engines will end up spending a large portion of there increased power pushing larger planes. This allows the engine to shrink retaliative to the plane and free’s up more internal space for fuel. Giving the plane longer range while also putting some of the increase into an also higher power to weight ratio.

    Given the large scale industrial commitment to the f18 engine size and the f15 engine size you will see planes designed around those engine sizes and not engines designed around new planes. New twin engine planes using those engines will tend to exhibit a growth in max take off weight as a result.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2156651
    Siddar
    Participant

    Range of flight: F-35A 1,850 km. EF-2000 – 2600 km (without tanks), max. range – 3700 km.

    If on the F-35 were two tanks (installation is not planned), the distance will increase to 2222 km

    A 760 nautical mile radius is a 2.815 kilometer range if I’m doing the conversions right.

    in reply to: long range AAM with missile submunition #2181195
    Siddar
    Participant

    As I said earlier I could possibly find such a concept appealing as an hat trick to counter the airborne high power radars envisaged for the proposed US 6gen fighter (that I found an absolute, complete, total and ludicrous madness by itself anyway).
    Imagine submunitions ejected just before the missile enter in Laser effective range and approaching it from different angles: power laser for their own way of working just can’t focus over more than one target so some of them would surely pass.
    It would however work in the opposite way than Hopsalot imagined, several ammo for just one target but in the end is a single (although big) missile anyway.

    This is only going to work if laser is short range enough for you to do the above. if isn’t it will foil your plans by shooting down missile before any sub munitions can deploy. You would have been better off sending multiple missiles in that case.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2182349
    Siddar
    Participant

    285 fighter aircraft out to 2025, valued at USD12.5 billion.

    LM will be selling a lot of used F16s then because 12.5 billion / 285 is about 44 million per aircraft. No western new build aircraft can match that price. So you’re looking at secondhand western, Chinese, or Russian planes.

    in reply to: Embraer KC-390 rolled out #2182486
    Siddar
    Participant

    There aren’t 60 total orders. Most countries only expressed interest in a future purchase

    I see what your saying, the foreign sales are not firmed orders yet only the ones from Brazil and Brazil was responsible for the delay in testing because of lack of funds. This seems to be a good plane but unless it gets some decent sized firm orders fairly soon it likely wont achieve the critical mass on the production side needed to compete on price with C130J.

    in reply to: long range AAM with missile submunition #2182823
    Siddar
    Participant

    Strap two stingers to the side of a Meteor missile, maybe a triple stage Cuda with two front end stages and a booster stage that separates into two missiles after boost phase.

    Not really sure what the advantage of doing the above would have over just adding more missiles.

    in reply to: Embraer KC-390 rolled out #2183288
    Siddar
    Participant

    Cost is not the same as price. They wont bank 30 million directly on each plane.

    They have $1.7 billion invested and 60 total orders. It means they have to sale planes at well above production cost in order to repay the initial investment by Embraer. C130J seems to be selling in the 70-80 million range. If KC390 sale price is well above C130J it will struggle to gain orders.

    In the end it comes down to the price Embraer will charge for the plane aka as the cost the buyer will pay. Versus the price LM will charge for a C130J.

    It would be really helpfull for KC390 if it could land a decent sized order from one of the other BRIC counties.

    in reply to: Embraer KC-390 rolled out #2183300
    Siddar
    Participant

    What is the expected cost per plane? Looks like at least 30 million a plane on the current 60 orders will have to go to repaying Embraers original investment. That may make competing against the C130J difficult.

    I think they need to break out of their current South American box orders wise here. They need to get some orders from China, India, Russia, Middle East, Asia if they want to be competitive with C130J.

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2183666
    Siddar
    Participant

    Three times as many of the people polled in an American poll would prefer 1,000 jobs to be created in an American-owned factory in USA rather than 2,000 jobs being created in a Chinese-owned factory in USA. Which would you prefer?

    I would prefer more jobs in general over ownership except for key industries.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 227 total)