dark light

SteveO

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 886 through 900 (of 1,444 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System #2045789
    SteveO
    Participant

    I believe the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System guidance kit is going to cost about $10,000.

    in reply to: UH-1Y chopper Photo… #2622167
    SteveO
    Participant
    in reply to: Eurofighter #2622365
    SteveO
    Participant

    The Typhoon wasn’t designed to fight F/A-22s, so the stealthy F/A-22 is obviously superior. Compared to all the other fighters available, the Typhoon is better or at least as good.

    in reply to: Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System #2045867
    SteveO
    Participant

    Excuse me but the description of the APKWS as a smart rocket sounds like a marketing term to make the system seem less expensive. Isn’t a smart rocket simply a guided missile?

    It’s a guidance kit like the JDAM, it turns a existing dumb weapon into a smart weapon.

    in reply to: Eurofighter #2622605
    SteveO
    Participant

    It’s going to be very good, but it’s not perfect. It will be the best fighter the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain have ever operated and the pilots will love it ๐Ÿ™‚

    If you enter Eurofighter or Typhoon in the search tool you will see all the previous threads on it.

    in reply to: Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System #2045907
    SteveO
    Participant

    matt, I thought I had heard of a similar Russian system, any info on it?

    F1Chris, I’d like to see APKWS on Harriers too. The RAF have been using CRV7s in Afghanistan recently, I guess unguided and laser guided rockets would make up for the GR7s lack of guns.

    RAF Harrier strikes in Afghanistan revealed article http://www.janes.com/defence/air_forces/news/jdw/jdw050623_2_n.shtml

    in reply to: Cruise Missile Defense #2622998
    SteveO
    Participant

    Dispersal of forces is a good passive defence. I think all the current base closures are a very bad idea in light of the increasing cruise missile threat, I can see a Pearl Harbour situation happening where someone looses a lot of equipment in a cruise missile sneak attack.

    Armed barrage balloons might be a good defence system with a bunch of missiles and sensors hanging from them.

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2623080
    SteveO
    Participant

    I think you are exaggerating a little bit here SteveO. EU is so much more than just a fighter jet, even if we aviation buffs might have a hard time realizing this. ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

    Fair comment, but better defence procurement co-operation would save EU countries billions.

    In my opinion the JSF situation is more evidence that we need more EU integration for the european weapon aquisitions :p

    I agree, if EU countries could get their replacement programs running at the same time, a lot of effort and money could be saved.

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2623483
    SteveO
    Participant

    The problem with European involvement in the JSF program is that each country is acting as a individual customer. If they had acted as one and joined at the same time, they might have found themselves in a better position.

    In my opinion the JSF situation is more evidence that the EU isn’t going to work.

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2623566
    SteveO
    Participant

    In business it is not about who deserves what, nobody givs a sh!t bout that. It is ALL about what is written in the contract..

    Thats right, non-US participation in the JSF program is all about doing what they tell you, when they tell you, for the price they tell you.

    And if you don’t like it they will find someone else to do it.

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2623574
    SteveO
    Participant

    why is the RN very insistent on the JSF , compared to the Rafale which is equivalent to the Typhoon (RAFs future main fighter), already exists and can easily operate from the 60,000t carriers RN is planning. wont the french give them a sweet offset deal , being close buddies an all ๐Ÿ˜€ ?

    The ASTOVL capability of the JSF is the only reason the UK needed to be in the program.

    The RN didn’t know it might get carriers big enough to operate a CTOL airgroup so the STOVL JSF was the best option at the time. If the STOVL JSF gets cancelled the RN could buy the CV JSF, Rafale or Super Hornet but they only need about 60 so they might as well just buy the most cost effective solution.

    Without STOVL JSF the RAF could buy more Typhoons to replace the Harriers, but this would probably be unnecessary due to defence cuts.

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2623610
    SteveO
    Participant

    Flight International article- Europe warned on F-35 dangers http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2005/06/14/Navigation/181/199030/Europe+warned+on+F-35+dangers.html

    Quote- The WEU analysis says JSF programme participation by Italy and the UK ties those nations โ€œfor over a decade to a US project which makes no industrial or technological contribution to [the] European defence industrial and technology base.

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2623884
    SteveO
    Participant

    UK JSF website http://www.jsf.org.uk/

    in reply to: Distiller's demand – UK get out of JSF! #2624245
    SteveO
    Participant

    Stealth is a nice feature, but is it necessary ? Will the JSF be more effective in killing old MiG’s and bombing 3rd world armies ?

    Good point, thats why the US Army cancelled the RAH-66 Commanche.

    in reply to: A12 AVENGER AIRCRAFT(STEALTH BOMBER) #2624247
    SteveO
    Participant

    The FB-22s proposed bulged weapon bay doors for 2000lb bomb carriage and SDB carriage in the intake bays could relatively easily be applied to the F/A-22.

    I can see the current F/A-22s becoming a formidable strike force ๐Ÿ™‚

Viewing 15 posts - 886 through 900 (of 1,444 total)