wilhelmThe Welsh side is shaping up to be quite good. I would pick them to beat the French in the semi-final, although one can never, ever discount the French.
The All Blacks should handily beat an injury hit, relatively limited, but passionate Argentinian side in the next round of quarter finals. The Australian/South African clash is difficult to pick. South Africa have been impressive, but have lost key players to injury. They also have a very interesting and unique coach who has confused most rugby pundits with his selections for this match.
Australia will be looking for a redemptive big performance after their tame defeat to a magnificent Irish side a week or two ago.
Very difficult to choose this one.
wilhelmThe Welsh side is shaping up to be quite good. I would pick them to beat the French in the semi-final, although one can never, ever discount the French.
The All Blacks should handily beat an injury hit, relatively limited, but passionate Argentinian side in the next round of quarter finals. The Australian/South African clash is difficult to pick. South Africa have been impressive, but have lost key players to injury. They also have a very interesting and unique coach who has confused most rugby pundits with his selections for this match.
Australia will be looking for a redemptive big performance after their tame defeat to a magnificent Irish side a week or two ago.
Very difficult to choose this one.
wilhelmNew Zealand has won the William Webb Ellis Cup once, the inaugral tournament in 1987. England They were runners up in 1995 and played well in the final despite all the team being very ill following being poisoned by bookies who paid a woman to spike the tea urn in their hotel. The Australians and the South Africans have won the cup twice each, and the English just once.
What am I supposed to be taking note of??
Ahh, this old chestnut.
And yet nobody has ever furnished any proof of these allegations. Allegations which are very poor in taste may I add.
My Kiwi mate insists on repeating this myth, and saying that the All Blacks were vomiting on the side of the field. I was there in the stadium that day, and saw no such thing. When I ask him to show evidence from the omnipresent TV footage, he changes the subject. The story has also varied between a hotel employee poisoning all of their lunch, a waitress at a restaurant off the premises poisoning a third of the players, and now a woman poisoning the tea urn.
It is a myth, and believed only in a small geographical area in the southern Pacific.
Back to real life, the quarter-finals start in about 14 hours time, and the Wales-Ireland game promises to be a cracker.
wilhelmNew Zealand has won the William Webb Ellis Cup once, the inaugral tournament in 1987. England They were runners up in 1995 and played well in the final despite all the team being very ill following being poisoned by bookies who paid a woman to spike the tea urn in their hotel. The Australians and the South Africans have won the cup twice each, and the English just once.
What am I supposed to be taking note of??
Ahh, this old chestnut.
And yet nobody has ever furnished any proof of these allegations. Allegations which are very poor in taste may I add.
My Kiwi mate insists on repeating this myth, and saying that the All Blacks were vomiting on the side of the field. I was there in the stadium that day, and saw no such thing. When I ask him to show evidence from the omnipresent TV footage, he changes the subject. The story has also varied between a hotel employee poisoning all of their lunch, a waitress at a restaurant off the premises poisoning a third of the players, and now a woman poisoning the tea urn.
It is a myth, and believed only in a small geographical area in the southern Pacific.
Back to real life, the quarter-finals start in about 14 hours time, and the Wales-Ireland game promises to be a cracker.
wilhelmlike the article says, it is attempting to fill a niche currently occupied by more expensive and less versatile aircraft. Particularly transport planes and turboprop trainers that are often used in roles that they are not ideally suited for.
Botswana, Namibia, and Mocambique are a few countries that spring readily to mind, South Africa notwithstanding. Botswana has been slowly building a more credible force, particularly in relation to it’s shared border with Zimbabwe.
The article does point out that:
Paramount and Aerosud say the Ahrlac’s is designed for police, border patrols and forestry agencies—not just defense ministries. They also see potential sales in Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. Paramount and Aerosud say they have received interest from potential customers but decline to say from whom.
Governments in Africa contend with huge distances, unsecured borders and bad roads. Most lack funding for advanced Western jet and helicopter technology. So Paramount aimed to create an aircraft “that would do 80% of what a helicopter did but at a fraction of the cost,” Mr. Ichikowitz says
It will have an endurance of over 7 hours on a single tank of fuel. It can also function as an inshore maritime patrol aircraft, and is designed to be modular and rapidly reconfiguarable, with a variety of sensor and armament packages. It is designed to operate from forward, primitive bases, and be self deployable to these bases, with a minimum or no logistics train.
wilhelmJust found this on ‘Defense News‘…..
But reports that Cobham was to equip Pakistan’s Il-78s with refueling pods were incorrect. A Cobham official said at last week’s biannual Pakistani defense exhibition, IDEAS2008, that the pods were still the Soviet-designed UPAZs, and that the refueling kits on receiving aircraft, such as the newly upgraded Mirage-IIIs, were likely to be South African in origin.
Ken
That Pakistani Mirage-III installation certainly looks identical to the probes installed on the original Cheetah E models.
wilhelmThere’s an 8 year difference in entry dates, almost a generation apart when you consider the rate of technological progress in the 1960s.
For stats on Soviet aircraft, http://www.airwar.ru is good:
For the Su-15 of 1967, a practical range of 1550 km
For the Su-15TM of the 1970s, a practical range of 1380 kmWikipedia gives the Lightning F.6 a range of 1370 km…
Levsha, there were 90 production SU-15’s produced in 1967, the year in which it entered PVO service. The first were operational by spring 1967, which makes it a bit more than 6 years, not 8.
The above is for accuracy purposes only, and I agree with you regarding the great technology leaps in the 1960’s. I was responding to Sens who said the two interceptors were from different decades.
They are not.
I agree with you that the early Lightnings are more akin to the SU-9. Certainly also, the F.6 is contemporary with the SU-15.
Thanks for the cool link BTW.:)
EDIT: That’s a great link, actually.
wilhelmThe Lightning entered service with 74 sqdn in 1960. They started equipping with the F.1 in the middle of that year.
Sens states they are from different decades. Both entered service in the 1960’s.
Whilst I agree the SU-9 was timelined with the early Lightnings, certainly the F.6 can be compared to the SU-15.
Interesting stats Levsha. Now let’s compare SU-15 similar profile times?
wilhelmThe Su-15 and the Lightning were not comparable in role and were from different decades. The Su-15 ned 13 minutes to reach 52480 feet/16 km height to have still some modest range. In a military climb and under best cruise conditions high up it has a total range with ETs of 1700 km or close to two hour airborne time.
Almost every sentence in your post is wrong.
Both entered service in the 1960’s.
Both were fast climbing, short ranged interceptors guided to their intended targets (bombers or recce platforms) by large, fixed ground radar installations.
If the Lightning also wanted to, as you have put it, “have still some modest range”, it also wouldn’t climb at it’s fastest possible rate. Hence the climb profile used in RAF service. Obvious.
You are not being honest here. Why don’t you quote the SU-15’s and Lightnings quickest time, and then also their most likely operational climb-to-height profile/stats Sens?
wilhelmThe SU-15, in it’s various guises, served the Soviets for about 30 years. Like mentioned earlier, it was a comparable in role, and roughly in time, with the Lightning.
Although it was probably quicker and had a higher climb rate than the Lightning, and naturally had far more space for a larger, higher powered radar.
wilhelmLooking at the two clips, I must say that Douglas certainly built an absolutely beautiful looking aeroplane. A joy to watch when in the air.
wilhelmLooking at the two clips, I must say that Douglas certainly built an absolutely beautiful looking aeroplane. A joy to watch when in the air.
wilhelmIt never came close to specifications of climb-rate/acceleration, service ceiling and range to name the three most important ones for an interceptor. That were lowered later on, but still not met. Al the related data and claims are from Russian sources. Just the delays in the development of the MiG-23 allowed the Su-15 to enter front-line service in some numbers.
That’s the first I’ve heard of that. The SU-15TM never had issues with its speed/climb-rate and service ceiling that I’m aware of. For example, the lightened, more powerful, and much later last edition of the Mig-23, the MLD, was able to pip the SU-15TM in climb rate, but I am unconvinced of any of the other models could beat it.
Do you have further info?
wilhelmI would be tempted to do a very detailed pre – flight inspection if I was to take over the aircraft after a display like that!
Also of great interest is the share physical strength this man is displaying! Flying a DC-4/C-54 (what ever you want to call it) like that takes brute strength – and a VERY good flight engineer. Look at the restart on #3 and #4. That flight engineer certainly knows what he is doing.As for the pilot – does anyone know if he is still alive??
The display was in April 1990.
The DC-4 was piloted by Raymond Hobart Houghton and Sarel Ceronio, 2 very experienced South African Air Force pilots. Not sure who the flight engineer was.
Both are alive and well as far as I know, and still flying.
wilhelmI would be tempted to do a very detailed pre – flight inspection if I was to take over the aircraft after a display like that!
Also of great interest is the share physical strength this man is displaying! Flying a DC-4/C-54 (what ever you want to call it) like that takes brute strength – and a VERY good flight engineer. Look at the restart on #3 and #4. That flight engineer certainly knows what he is doing.As for the pilot – does anyone know if he is still alive??
The display was in April 1990.
The DC-4 was piloted by Raymond Hobart Houghton and Sarel Ceronio, 2 very experienced South African Air Force pilots. Not sure who the flight engineer was.
Both are alive and well as far as I know, and still flying.
Sign In
