dark light

rsetiawan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 266 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • rsetiawan
    Participant

    WTH. That actually does look cool. And i have been hater of the scheme since day one. Still, i wont give up on my hate. ๐Ÿ˜€

    yess!. the top color and the russian sky blue simply dont match!. ๐Ÿ˜ก
    yess! whoever invented the scheme must be shot in public for the destruction of beauty of asset of the people. ๐Ÿ˜ก

    in reply to: UK considers Rafale and F-18 as 'interim aircraft' #2356110
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    sine UK is so poor they might end up buying tejas! dirt cheap!! :diablo:

    rsetiawan
    Participant

    Su-34. New colours of the new Fullback for the Russian Air Forces!:)
    http://www.airliners.net/open.file/2054851/L/

    aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh hurt my eeeeeeeyeeeeeees~!! ๐Ÿ˜ก
    couldnt some one taught them elementary lesson in color harmony ? ๐Ÿ˜ก

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2357023
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    The Pentagon is gearing up to restructure Lockheed Martinโ€™s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program for a third time in three years, sources said, with production of more than 120 more planes to be postponed to save money and allow more time for development

    the beginning of new spiral of rising price

    in reply to: Pak-Fa Thread episode 19 #2361750
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    “Rita” is the nickname for the automatic warning voice. “Pull up pull up”, “High G” etc. Warns pilot of problems. Well, Rita started shouting that first left engine was on fire, then right. Nothing happened.

    Rita has given false alarms before on T-50. I have a file from October of 2010, where Rita said two hydraulic systems were gone.

    nah!
    they should use Putin voice for warning alarm!… there will be no complain anymore, false of not ๐Ÿ˜€

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2362412
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/01/dn-design-blamed-for-f35c-tailhook-issues-011712/

    ๐Ÿ˜‰

    And Aboulafia, who is about as accurate on mil-aviation issues as a Vietnam-era Sparrow:

    I’m seeing it now. The YF-17 is just like the F-35C. :p

    nah any F-35 can land on ship….
    problem is whether they can fly again once they landed :p

    rsetiawan
    Participant

    My Ronald Reagan worshipping friend,

    you are looking at the french fry and missing the overall combo deal.

    its not just a $10 million upgrade (which is in the low end.. not that I expect it to go as far as France’s $50-60 million Mirage upgrades)..

    upgrading means you are keeping these MiG-31 in service, which means continuing to fund its spares, weapons, pilot training.

    you want to increase these upgrades from 6-8 per year to 30, that means you got over 20 more airframes to take care of.

    MiG-31 was and still good at what it does.. but its in its twilight years.. its the Steve Nash of combat aircraft. its replacement is on the horizon. Best keep a few MiG-31’s upgradeable, just long enough until the Pak-fa comes online. Pak-fa is the Blake Griffen of fighters.

    You don’t see the Swedish upgrading all their Viggens to JA-37D when the Gripen was about to come did you?

    grippen is normal fighter replaceable by alot of newer fighter
    MiG-31 is a super warplane, one of its kind, the pinnacle of speed and power in modern airwar. to replace it an entirely new design must be created. PAKFA more than enough as flanker and fulcrum replacement, but not MiG-31

    in reply to: F-35, third restructure in three years #2362519
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    Some will appreciate the title of this post. Almost certain VADM Dave Venlet will.

    Bob Cox over at the Ft Worth Star Telegram has this to say about what now seems to have become annual event – specifically, the third restructure in three years of the F-35 program:

    http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_talk/2012/01/dod-officials-to-review-update-f-35-program-plans.html

    As Bob says, provision of this information is due in no small part to the diligence and hard work of Jason Sherman and the Team over at Inside Defense (subscription).

    Inside Defense reports that two (2) meetings of the DAB have apparantly been scheduled and, as Bob Cox says in his article:

    The outcomes from these meetings should provide yet another opportunity to calibrate (if not verify and validate) the estimates from the independent assessments made via the risk based cost modelling done by the team at Air Power Australia back in 2006:

    http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Costs%20and%20Pricing%20Data/JSFCostingHistory_3_Iss1.jpg

    http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Costs%20and%20Pricing%20Data/JSFCostingHistory_3_Iss1.jpg

    http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Costs%20and%20Pricing%20Data/GAO_Table_App1_15Mar11_Addendum.jpg

    http://i1004.photobucket.com/albums/af168/Horde01/JSF%20Costs%20and%20Pricing%20Data/GAO_Table_App1_15Mar11_Addendum.jpg

    ..

    uh huh…
    if unit price really 150mn US$ it would be cheaper if US keep producing F-22 and make a downgraded export variant that lack everything for its alies :confused:

    in reply to: Korea AHX, who will win? #2363639
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    whatever win it will be american inside…

    in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2363651
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    ok so from what you said it should look like this

    for combat
    F-16, Su-27, Su-30, Super Tucano, future KFX

    for training
    KT-1, T-50

    starting to look better! but I’m pretty sure that Indonesia ordered the TA-50 not the T-50, which has more combat equipment on it and to replace the single seat Hawk for combat duties.

    as to TR1.. I’m not sure if I would say Su-27 and Su-30s are the same in this case.. they got the Su-30MK2, doesn’t this version have some significantly different avionics and structural changes than the 27?

    plane is good, more number and more variation is better….
    that make our scale modeler happy ๐Ÿ˜Ž

    in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2363653
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    TNI-AU never bought any advance trainer as just trainer, Those advance trainers was and always have secondary attack roles (due to small size of TNI-AU fleet). This article from aviation week shows that : http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/asd/2011/05/27/05.xml&headline=Indonesia%20Orders%2016%20T-50s%20From%20Korea%20Aerospace

    The old L-29 Deflin also have light attack capabilities, The Bae Hawk Mk 53 is wired for Sidewinder, and the Indonesian ordered T-50 is actually TA-50 and it’s LIFT capabilities. This also being confirmed by KAI sources and Indonesian Min-Def.

    L29 have no attack capabilities, it is pure trainer …. which is why we grab 2nd handT-33 T bird during early East Timor integration in 70s….
    Hawk 53 purchased in 80s for jet trainer for skadik 102. those time a pilot started with bravo, then mentor then if a future fighter/attack pilot he go to jet fighter transition training with hawk 53 before he goes to skyhawk/tiger squadron. The training hierarchy of TNI-AU keep changing afterward and the 2ndary support fighter role only seriously used at those embargo days….

    in reply to: Should modern combat jets go back to dedicated designs? #2364227
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    Im all for dedicated hypersonic nuclear bomber then ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

    in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2364268
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    indeed, they already have too many types

    for combat
    F-16, F-5, Su-27, Su-30, Hawk 209, TA-50, Super Tucano, future KFX

    for training
    KT-1, T-34, SF-260, Hawk, Bravo

    ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

    granted the diversity was caused by different types of embargoes in the past.. but it looks more and more like India syndrome!

    perhaps it should be rationalized to

    combat:
    Su-30, TA-50, KFX, Super Tucano

    training
    KT-1, Hawk

    SF-260 stored/not operational
    bravo, partially been retired. All I saw in the sky today is T-34 and KT-1. KT-1 is purchased to replace the T-34. IIRC T-34 fleet are about 40 years old but the T-34 somehow still in very good condition despite its age so airforce finally using both. Our airforce habit is to use anything in its inventory until it literally fall away from the sky ๐Ÿ˜€ Actually we even manage to keep our C-47 in flyable condition til 1990s it retired because no one certified to fly it anymore ๐Ÿ˜€
    F-5 already 30+ years old (1980) not sure how long it will operational. since it is very tough and durable aircraft we will use it forever ๐Ÿ˜€
    so all our fighter are F-16, Flanker. future KFX actually never in the planning, it is a surprise project/purchase for everyone including our airforce brass…..

    Hawk 109/209 we purchase as dedicated strike fighter replacing A-4

    T-50, we purchase it as pure trainer not fighter or attack, it will replace former jet trainer BAe Hawk Mk-53 (only 4 left in our inventory and not sure in what condition).

    Super Tucano as a COIN replacing Bronco….

    in reply to: Any further need for Mach 3? #2364556
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    err… yes! it will be useful esp. on cargo plane i think…
    imagine if C-17/Il-76 can reach mach-3 or more… we can deploy our squad anywhere on earth quickly. Disaster aid also can deliver faster and help more…
    and if there is a hijacking or terrorism large group of special anti terror squad can be sent in no times…

    if u have a bomber with mach 3 speed today you dont even need those expensive stealth feature. just some jammer/c/f and watch enemy fighter and their missile lagged behind you….you are free to bombardment your enemy back to stone age….

    amongst saddam air force during ODS it was MiG-25 that most survivable, due to its speed isn it ?

    whether such performance can be reach economically is another question

    in reply to: T-50, M-346 and Yak-130 advance trainers future prospect? #2364559
    rsetiawan
    Participant

    Yes, governments do that. Buying two different things in two different contests means twice the negotiations, twice the bribes.
    Our government has done it so many times it makes no impression any more.

    add to that the financial dept. who stubbornly and idiotly want weapon to be purchased and reviewed each year/each purchase and whatever tiny detail in it instead of one big package with multiyear payment in the name of financial discipline during SMI era and quarrel between those and dod and legislative and whatnot I dontknow anymore ๐Ÿ˜ก

    Legislative also almost stop the flanker purchase during megawati era. They are against barter payment for a reason I dont understand. THanks God it is much easier nowaday because today gov’t is big oligarchy so everyone on the same boat ๐Ÿ˜€

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 266 total)