dark light

d'clacy

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 180 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Aussie news, nothing much. #2081122
    d’clacy
    Participant

    Apparently the Gibbs & Cox design selected is about 8’000 tons as against the Burkes 9’600 tons. Also it reportedly has only 64 VLS against the Burkes 96. That being the case it has no advantage over the F100, for all of its extra size.

    in reply to: RNZAF – no armed planes ? #2621810
    d’clacy
    Participant

    I would have thought that the Gripen would have been an excellent aircraft for the Kiwi’s.

    in reply to: Gripens doing well on the market #2626148
    d’clacy
    Participant

    I thought I read earlier this month that Gripen had been chosen by an Asian country? Was it Thailand?

    in reply to: Raptors at $258 Million each. #2616740
    d’clacy
    Participant

    Raptor now at US$258m. F35 projected US$50m. Raptor is expected to get cheaper as more produced, F35 dearer with further development. At what stage will it become more viable to have a fleet of F22’s as against F35’s? Like if F22 was three times price of F35’s, twice, what do you think?

    in reply to: Conformal Tanks #2631763
    d’clacy
    Participant

    Does anyone know how they affected the Rafale when fitted?

    in reply to: Catamarans and Trimarans in Service. #2070046
    d’clacy
    Participant

    Distiller, HSV1 & 2 I believe are Incat Catamarans, made in Tasmania. Similar to HMAS Jervis Bay which saw service in East Timor but has returned to commercial work.

    in reply to: AMX Photo Thread #2637435
    d’clacy
    Participant

    The AMX is also known as??

    in reply to: RAAF and ASEAN Air Forces #2650969
    d’clacy
    Participant

    when you say ‘pushing’ does that mean you have connections with the inside or something? or maybe a member of the Defence Force?
    Short answer…No.

    As for Gripen, EF-2000 and Rafael, they are good choices but consider the logistical support it needs for a short-range aircraft flying in the vast airspace of Australia. It would be a major headache for the military planners.
    Canpark, they have longer range than our F-18’s, so what would be the problem?

    in reply to: TSR2 vs MRCA (Tornado) #2651478
    d’clacy
    Participant

    The TSR2 was the only competitor to the F111, and they were both paper planes. Australia chose the F111, so the Brits did not proceed with the Tsr2, which apparently was considered by many to be the superior plane.
    Had we of chosen differently, we and the Brits would still be flying TSR2’s.

    in reply to: RAAF and ASEAN Air Forces #2651494
    d’clacy
    Participant

    I would be surprised if the A-4 Skyhawks generated much interest today, due to their age etc.

    I have been pushing for the RAAF to get a warplane beside the F-35. I believe that we are going to be vulnerable from 2006 onwards. Over several years 43 F18’s are going to be re-worked and fitted with new centre fuselage sections, with each plane being out of action for 12 months. Also the F-35 is going to be available to the RAAF much later than the planned 2012.
    I dont consider the F-35 to be an adequate replacement for the F-111, as it is only a small plane, originally designed to replace the F-16. We always said we wanted a twin engine aircraft, until the F-35 came up now a single engine will do.
    Failing the RAAF getting Su-32/34, or F15E’s (or K’s whichever is the most modern and appropriate), there does not seem to be a lot out there to replace the F-111. If we are going the way of multi-purpose aircraft, which are needed anyway to replace the F-18’s, maybe we should adopt a different mindset, and go for Air Defence as the main feature of a replacement aircraft, and get a couple of squadrons of E2000’s, Rafael’s, or Gripen’s, whichever are best suited, and cut down the number of F-35’s required accordingly.
    Any comments anyone?

    in reply to: Australia to get cruise missiles #2057764
    d’clacy
    Participant

    If we are only arming the Oriens and Hornets with the cruise missiles, I dont think our neighbours have much to worry about. Theyshould be more concerned if we armed the Collins subs with them, and some surface ships.

    in reply to: RAAF and ASEAN Air Forces #2653677
    d’clacy
    Participant

    Canpark, I will not argue with you that Aussies are racist. We certainly are. But your opinion of our view on asians is not correct. Most of us would prefer asians (oriental types anyway) to a lot of european and middle eastern nationalities. Most Australian Chinese are well respected in the community, as can be seen by positions they have attained. One is Lord Mayor of Melbourne at the moment.

    in reply to: JAS-39 VS F-35A #2653693
    d’clacy
    Participant

    I have seen in another place a comparison done by the Dutch AIrForce of F-35, Raphael, and Eurofighter.
    F-35 was given a rating of . . . 6.97
    Raphael ” ” ” ” ” ” 6.95
    Eurofighter ” ” ” ” 5.95 or similar.
    I wonder how the Grifen would have compared?

    in reply to: JAS-39 VS F-35A #2653813
    d’clacy
    Participant

    One good point not being mentioned… JAS39 available now, F35 in 8 – 10 years time. When you want the plane is a big consideration.
    Also cost. Current cost of Gripen is ????? whatever, but it is known. Anticipated cost of F35 may be a far cry from actual cost. (I rambled there but you should be able to work out my meaning).
    From figures I have seen the Gripen has similar weapon loading weight to F35.

    in reply to: RAAF and ASEAN Air Forces #2647793
    d’clacy
    Participant

    I for one am not happy that we are going to be replacing both F111 and F18’s with the F35. We have always had bombers and fighters. Now this plane, which I believe to be on the small side, as it was originally designed to replace the F-16, is going to be both our air-defence and strike aircraft. We could have done better surely, by retaining two seperate types of aircraft.

Viewing 15 posts - 166 through 180 (of 180 total)