dark light

Ich Dien

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 75 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: F-14: The 1970's Perspective #2472746
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    It is remarkable that the defense of the US carriers was based on an aircraft that was considered an interim solution by its makers. On the other hand, given the headache with the more modern F100 engines, it is questionable if the proposed F401 turbofan would have solved all problems.

    It has been postulated the the Fleet Air Defense mission was a stalking horse to help get the Navy a fighter into production to beat the FX to the punch. The F-111B had superior range and on station time than the F-14, but it was only going to carry 4 AIM-54s and would have been next to useless in regional hotspots like Vietnam with the BVR biased ROEs of the time. This scenario is much more likely the the dooms day all out nuclear attack by Russian surface vessels and Bombers the fleet might face. Even the fleet survived such an attack there wouldn’t be much left to bomb or support as most everything of military value would have been glassed. The Navy was also addressing the need for quick reaction times to regional conflicts with the VTOL Sea Control Ship concept. When the tide turned against the F-14 in 1973, the Navy had to fall back on the FADF mission to save the Tomcat as it was the only aircraft that could fulfil the role at a reasonable price and capability.

    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Isn’t there a “White House Lawn” consideration, namely that the MH53 would be too big for the current parking spot.

    The CH-53E’s rotor diameter is 5 meters larger than the SH-3’s and the Super Stallion is 13.5 meters longer than the Sea King. Would be a tight squeeze, considering the Kilo is going to be even bigger. Might need to do some landscaping.

    http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2937/washingtondcer5.jpg

    in reply to: Australian Governmant finally axes the Seasprite #2490460
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Well, Kaman still has subcontracts and guitars to keep them busy. Are the new build Kiwi Sea Sprites fairing any better?

    in reply to: KC767, KC330….what latest? #2493406
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Another Hollywood/Oscar anology…
    If Airbus wins, at Boeing HQ “There Will be Blood”.:D

    Looks like NG-EADS just drank Boeing’s milkshake.

    in reply to: Video of 22-plane Tomcat flyover. #2090059
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    This is easily the fastest flyby I’ve ever seen. Tomcat of course.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgkFjyuJQ9Q&feature=related

    I’ve wondered why the Navy didn’t slap a pave spike in one of the front Sparrow wells. Even with the seperation issues and air to ground limited AWG-9, the F-14A could have been a good fair weather low or mid level PGM dropper. Certainly could have saved the Navy some embarassment during the Lebanon affair.

    in reply to: Super Hornet buy to be reconsidered. #2496465
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Smith, Fitzgibbon and Gates discuss export of F-22 to Australia at AUSMIN.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/23/2170741.htm?section=australia

    in reply to: Speculating about the B-3 #2504240
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/benson.htm

    Here’s a cargo-bomber paper from the mid 1990s.

    in reply to: Boeing's 6th gen fighter #2506925
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Boeing also includes what used to be McDonnel Douglas and North American Rockwell. Might want to check aviation history for their contributions.

    NAA glory days were LONG, LONG, passed by the time Rockwell liquidated itself and slapping your bumper sticker over the Phantom Work’s tech base does not make it your own.

    in reply to: Boeing's 6th gen fighter #2506939
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    showing that Boeing ‘still has it’

    Did they ever really have it in the first place? The last fighter they designed that went into production was the P-26.

    in reply to: Swiss F-5 tiger replacement #2507675
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    It seems the Swiss have shown an interest in the F-20 😉

    http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/6108/f20switzviewersqo5.jpg

    in reply to: Your favourite what-if fighter #2509723
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    I always found the navalized F-117 variants interesting. Hindsight being 20/20, the Navy probably should have started out with a proven stealth design instead of jumping in head first with the A-12.

    in reply to: Swiss F-5 tiger replacement #2510480
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    I wonder what has more commonality with the F404, the RM12 or the F414.

    in reply to: Polish CASA 295 crashed #2510483
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    “He added that the passengers were officers attending an annual one-day conference in Warsaw on air safety.”

    Yeesh…

    in reply to: Supercruising(?) F-16s for India #2513803
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Here’s a chart of the US aerospace industry consolidiation in the peace dividend days. Also note that Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman almost merged in 1998 (approved by both company’s stock holders), but that was struck down by the governme. A similar argument was made about Boeing’s buy out of McDonnell Douglas, which would leave Boeing as the only supplier of commerical airliners. Ultimately, Boeing gobbled McDD up.

    in reply to: Self Escorting fighter concept #2525709
    Ich Dien
    Participant

    Much of this has to do with the advancement of technology in the mid and late 1970s that allowed radar to do both a2a and a2g effectively in a small package. The APG-66 allowed the F-16A to sling unguiged iron as accurately as or better than dedicated attackers like the A-7, F-111, Jaguar etc. The F-18 was the first naval aircraft from the onset meant to be a “flip the switch” a2a to a2g. The APG-65, Night Owl and improved cockpit ergonomics allowed the Hornet to fit both the light ground attack role of the aging A-7 and a supplementary fighter to the expensive F-14 effectively inspite of its deficient range.

    The miniturization of BVR weapons in the form of AMRAAM and Adder has also bolstered the self escorting concept. If active homing missiles were developed as big as the sparrow, albeit superior performance to the AMRAAM, then only large platforms such as the Eagle, Tomcat or Flanker would be able to carry them with out feeling the aerodynamic or weight pinch. ex. The F-16ADF was a dog with Sparrows, F-15 hardly feels the pain. With the AMRAAM a small(er) plane could carry 4 self escort missiles along with a warload and a fuel tank or two. With larger fighter bombers like the Eagle and Flanker the compact medium range missile will weigh less and take up less real estate allowing for more carriage of fuel or weapons.

    While multirole and self escort are nice feature to have in the post Cold War draw down bean counters have fallen in head over heels in love with them. Just look at the F-16s doing DEAD and CAS, F-15Es doing low level strike, Super Hornet doing, well, everything, and the tri-service F-35. In a perfect world there would still be dedicated platforms for a2a, CAS/BAI, EW, tanking etc. but the economic realities are not going to allow it.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 75 total)