The deal between Marsh Aviation and the Brazilian Navy is on hold by now because Marsh Aviation sold spare parts to Venezuela between 2005 and 2008 violating U.S. law (Arms Export Control Act) and the Department of State frozen all military deals of the company.
The brazilians aren´t happy with this because they sent personal(with family) to U.S. be trained by Marsh and they´re are doing nothing there costing more money to the Brazilian Navy than expected.
You can read more http://www.advivo.com.br/blog/rafael-cruz/marinha-do-brasil-mantem-militares-ociosos-nos-eua. It is in portuguese.
Oh well.
And that, in a nutshell, is why many countries are seeking to diversify and source other suppliers.
Pretty much why the A-Darter between South Africa and Brazil may be a pointer to the future, particularly wrt BRICS countries.
– – – Updated – – –
Maybe France should consider 4-5 to use as Tankers on the Charles De Gaulle???
I think it is high time Europe developed an airframe of it’s own, and not rely on an outside source.
After a hiatus over the last 15 years or so, it would appear that more nations globally are operating, or considering operating carriers again.
A common airframe that could carry out COD, AEW, Tanker, and ASW might sell over the next 20 or 30 years to the tune of 80 to 120 or so airframes, particularly if the EU/Britain one day get themselves in gear over a common carrier design. One may envisage a 4 or 5 strong EU /British carrier fleet, and then you also have Brazil and India looking to continue in carriers.
There may be others….
Not everybody would be interested in buying from the US, due to the the case stated above, which is hardly unique when one looks at examples over the last 25 years…
Beautiful !! exactly what i wanted to see, except i thought it was the Ericsson radar.
Now only question is: can UK carriers launch and recover this AEW also ?
This article was from 15 months ago.
A final decision is scheduled for late next year, with Embraer expected to participate as sensor and mission systems integrator.
This means the AEW decision was meant to be recently, in the last few months.
Does anyone have any further info?
It seems that the airframe, even after prolonged storage, is quite capable of being reactivated and put back into carrier service.
Wouldn’t it be something to see the Grumman product make a comeback as an AEW machine after all these years?
It’s small and light enough for the smaller carriers, designed for the purpose when there isn’t exactly a lot of competitors out there, and is a more efficient machine than the enforced use of a helicopter.
Of course, it would need a catapult…
I love British and their sayings. Not mocking, I’ve never met a Brit that I didn’t really enjoy hanging out with. “they look in good nick”……about half the things you guys say make no sense whatsoever but I love it! 😀
I aint a Brit, although that is a British saying.:D
The Tracker was an extremely important aircraft, when you reflect on it.
It combined the Hunter and Killer phases of ASW that were previously carried out by 2 aircraft into a single airframe.
Always thought it was a far more practical airframe compared to the other two Western types, the Gannet and the Alize. This fact is borne out by the fact that it was used far more widely than those 2 types, which are now retired. I’m aware that these two had design contraints placed on them, before anybody thinks I’m having a go…:)
The Turbo props have given it a new lease of life. They, together with other modifications, have shaved 2000kg off the empty weight, and provide easier maintenance, more power, and less volatile fuel, which was one reason for their retirement from the USN.
I’ve read that the Trackers are far from the end of their service lives, due to Grummans traditionally rugged build and design practice.
There were 3 useful family members offering the benefit of parts, maintenance, and training savings.
The S-2 Tracker ASW.
The C-1 Trader COD
The WF-2 Tracer AEW.
Here is one of the Brazilian Traders being rebuilt at Marsh Aviation, followed by an artists impression.
It appears 4 are going through the upgrade to KC-2 standard for the COD and air-refuelling roles.
I’m not too sure whether the AEW variant has been funded, but I would be interested to see what they look like.
While the US also had probe a drogue, why don’t more go to the flying boom.
The receptacle imposes few to zero penalties on the airframe?
The probe/drogue is far more adaptable airframes wise, as can be seen by it’s overwhelming usage worldwide.
Some further news from LAAD 2013.
It appears the missile demonstrator is called Marlin, of which a model was shown.
Denel Dynamics is developing new surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles as part of a technology demonstrator programme that is leveraging off its experience with the A-Darter, R-Darter and Umkhonto missiles.
Known as Marlin, the all-weather air defence missile technology programme was unveiled at the 9th biennial LAAD Defence and Security International Exhibition held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, last week.
According to Denel Dynamics, the Marlin technology demonstrator programme was contracted by the Department of Defence through Armscor and will result in a missile that is launched at a target in three to four years’ time.
Marlin technology will subsequently be used for Navy, Army and Air Force applications, with synergy achieved due to common subsystems. The missile will use some subsystems and system architecture from Denel’s proven Umkhonto surface-to-air missile and its A-Darter short-range air-to-air missile.
The performance of the missiles from the Marlin programme is expected to be in the latest generation class relevant to each type. Denel expects the Marlin All-Weather surface-to-air missile (SAM) will have a much larger range than typical Infra-Red SAMs.
At the moment South Africa is seeking a partner to reduce risk on the project and elevate it to a full-scale joint development programme. “With that, comes skills growth and industry job opportunity for both parties,” Denel said. “The outcome of collaboration on Marlin will be a Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missile for the two Air Forces and an All-Weather Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) for the two Navies and Armies.”
Brazil is being courted as a partner nation, notably due to its involvement in the A-Darter programme, which will near completion towards the end of 2014, as the missile is currently entering the qualification phase.
Jan Wessels, CEO of Denel Dynamics, said there is potential to collaborate further with Latin America in the domain of guided missiles, aerospace, defence and high technology in general. “As seen with the A-Darter programme, this type of initiative can sustain and grow industry,” said Wessels.
“Competitive, indigenous, guided missiles design and development capability serves a number of strategic objectives for both South Africa and other advanced developing nations. Locally developed defence products translate into improved technological capability for both countries and create an independent defence capability that is of strategic importance.”
From a South African industry perspective, Wessels remarked upon the absolute synergy between the Brazilian and South African teams in terms of vision, work ethic and technical capability on the A-Darter project. “We look forward to expanding on this through more joint programmes,” said Wessels, who aims to manage his company to become the technology advancement leader in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), and other developing countries.
http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30178
Found this wonderful thread when researching exactly which Mirage III variants had the extra underfuselage pylons.
We now know that even the Swiss Mirage III had them, as can be seen in theis thread.
On the topic of current users, Ecuador is now a user of both the J-79 Kfir C10 and ATAR 9K50 Cheetah C, as well as Kfir and Cheetah twin seaters.
To answer an earlier question by Phantom, the Cheetah C has the rear and front under fuselage pylons.
Anyway, back to the topic.
Seeing as somebody has wingloading on the brain obsessively, the F-104’s wing design must have led to a smooth ride at sea level, especially compared to the Mirage III.
I am actually pretty proud of my solar/battery/pedal powered passenger plane with 15 kg/m2 wingloading that cruises 240 kts at 25 km.
Especially the Goldschmied type air intake in nose section for ventilation etc. …and the xtreme drag reduction that makes it all happen.
Bear in mind that Solar Impulse goes at 15 km at 70 km/h using only 7 watts of power….and weighs 1600 kilos.
Will all your passengers be experienced cyclists?
Will there be a BMI and age check of the passengers at check in?
Do disabled people and the elderly qualify, as long as they bring a superfit family relative to take up the slack?
:p
The Solar Impulse takes a grand total of 1 person, and travels at half the speed of a motor vehicle on a highway.
He is just trolling, remember this is the fellow who came up with his Neverland rocket powered interceptor that was too small to accomplish anything he claimed for but ignored basic reality that stated so.
Or the 40 to 60 seat passenger aircraft powered by 250m2 of solar panels, that required the passengers to pedal for pressurisation.:rolleyes:
On that note about trolling, where is F-18 Hamburger/F-16 Hotdog/J-31 Burritto…..?
topspeed, who wants to make a supercruising fighter of the size of the Me163 (more or less), powered by a 750kg thrust engine (at first) comes to explain to evrrybody that a fighter that actually did perform above M2.0 some 60 years ago couldn’t do it…
eeer… :rolleyes:
It gets better.
Was having a peruse through some posts of his.
A complete fixation on engine thrust, such as this from another thread:
That looks awful lot like a Mig-21; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-7
It is the only aeroplane with turbofan to go mach 2 excluding Helwan HA-300 by Willy Messerschmitt using under 65 kN thrust ?!
(a clue here: What’s the name of the French plane in this thread?:rolleyes:)
Then, the motherload:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=117089
😀
Topspeed, I admire your enthusiasm and humour.:)
There is some physics involved here..a 6½ metric tonne machine ( empty ) just cannot go mach 2 with 733 kg/m2 wingloading with 69 kN force.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter
Mig-21 was 5 tonnes empty with similar powered engine and had mach 2.23 top speed had only 384 kg/m2 wingloading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-21
Mirage III is pretty close to Mig-21 with 393 kg/m2 wingloading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_III
Remarkably went mach 2.2 with just 60.8 kN force ( less interference drag due to delta wing ).
—-
Popular Mechanics hit again INSERT from wiki ( F-104 ); But surprisingly, artists working for various magazines came up with drawings very close to the actual design. A drawing in the Popular Mechanics, August 1954 edition was very close to the actual design.[6]
Sorry. I feel I just have to quote this again.:D:rolleyes:
Why don’t you enlighten us all, Topspeed, with what exactly you are trying to tell us here?
Because I think you have everybody on this forum quite bewildered.:D
Also, quoting wikipedia and popular mechanics is not going to help you much here, I’m afraid….
Also, the plane that can’t go mach 2 (due to wingloading/thrust “physics”:rolleyes:) that actually has, and set official speed records.
This then gets changed to: It can’t do it in “warmode”, at any altitude.
Whatever that may be….
Come now Topspeed.
Never confuse opinion for fact.
Rooivalk.
Nice shot of a 70mm rocket salvo at 1:00 from inside the cockpit.
Another one, this time of a Mirage F1AZ.
Probably boring for some, but nice for the purist.
No crappy music either…
There is some physics involved here..a 6½ metric tonne machine ( empty ) just cannot go mach 2 with 733 kg/m2 wingloading with 69 kN force.
Nonsense.
And some people seem to forget that a certain Mr Darryl Greenamyer managed a blistering 988mph, or about 1600km/h in an F-104 in the extremely dense air at sea level. (or rather, 60ft altitude);)
A record which still stands today.
He’d actually gone faster on an earlier effort, but one of the timimg cameras malfuntioned, making the higher speed of 1010mph not valid.
As mentioned by others, the F-104 set world speed records over mach 2, and was considered the first operational fighter capable of mach 2.
Which makes certain peoples claims that “it wasn’t fast” or “wasn’t capable of mach 2” a little disconcerting.;)