dark light

comoford

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 94 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Hot Dog's Ketchup Filled F-35 News Thread #2317324
    comoford
    Participant

    F-35B lift fan underside

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/7117061193/in/photostream/
    http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/8544/f35liftfan.jpg

    F-35B door mounted missile station w/ AMRAAM

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/6970984144/in/photostream/
    http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/6484/f35missile.jpg

    btw/
    USMC AV-8 harriers operating from a austere FOB in Afgnanistan
    http://youtu.be/hLUZARGNzJ4

    in reply to: F-35B or F-35C for the Royal Navy #2021058
    comoford
    Participant

    I’ll balance the thing then. F-35B.

    Actually useable off their new through-decks. Plus, as Comoford says, suddenly lots of short hard surface strips in theatre that become deployment options.

    You don’t really need a carrier when you can go island hopping throughout the region.

    in reply to: F-35B or F-35C for the Royal Navy #2021288
    comoford
    Participant

    F-35B for all those small airfields in SE Asia and SW Pacific.

    Fly it out of Naval Air Station Christmas Island

    in reply to: 'New' RAF BAe-146 #2340934
    comoford
    Participant

    Occasionally charters are hard to come by and this happens:

    http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/380/gordonbrown1.jpg

    http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/921/gordonbrown2.jpg

    http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3540/gordonbrown3r.jpg

    http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/7439/gordonbrown4.jpg

    comoford
    Participant

    As for MRTT, I can see this being a real cash cow for Cobham et al, at the taxpayers expense of course!

    If it had a boom, they could’ve leased some out to, cough …. Israel.

    in reply to: Why is NH-90 and Tigre failures? #2298145
    comoford
    Participant

    The big question is how it is possible that NH-90 have no proper place for side gunners like on S-70/UH-60 and even on latest Super Puma/Cougar. Yes side gunners in dedicated place, no door gunners that block mounted troops to do fast disembark. This is ******* incredible!

    The NH90 does have a place for the door gunners. Its just poorly designed – way to small and obstructs the cabin.

    The window at the back is the door gunners station.

    http://www.adf-gallery.com.au/gallery/albums/MRH-90-A40-007/20090807raaf8194170_0027.jpg

    http://www.guncopter.com/images/nh-90-cabin.jpg

    Compare UH-60 Black Hawk

    http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/troops-aug2-2-550x366.jpg
    http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2699/4516670629_ae3fd78d45.jpg

    in reply to: Why is NH-90 and Tigre failures? #2318332
    comoford
    Participant

    who’s complaining about these aircraft?

    After all, they are completely new aircraft, there might be teething problems…

    The Tigers and NH90 were sold to Australia as being almost production ready and as close to off-the-shelf as possible.

    Turns out they needed A LOT more development.

    The biggest complaint about the NH90 is that the floor is too fragile and easily damaged by soldiers’ boots. I don’t quite see that as a serious problem.

    Fixing that might mean adding more weight = loss of performance.

    in reply to: General UCAV/UAV discussion – A New Hope #2355127
    comoford
    Participant

    Apparently Global hawk is to be killed and U2 to be kept flying for a lot longer.

    USAF are killing off the Block 30 but are still pursuing the Block 40 Global Hawk. USN still keeping Global Hawk for BAMS.

    in reply to: UK considers Rafale and F-18 as 'interim aircraft' #2356004
    comoford
    Participant

    The RAAF managed to an operational F-18F sqn in wihtin 4 years. Pilots and crews were trained in the US by the USN with some pilots being carrier qualified.

    Very easy way for the UK to develop CATOBAR experience. That’s the ultimate goal right?

    in reply to: Military Aviation News 2011 June – #2305057
    comoford
    Participant

    RAAF Wants C-27J Rather Than C295

    Despite being more expensive, C-27Js can accommodate the Army’s G-Wagens and LAND 121 light vehicles.

    …. could use larger aircraft, such as its Lockheed Martin C-130s, to transport the G-Wagons. But Brown says “then you end up with small loads on the C-130 and this is not an efficient use” of the aircraft. He also says the air force wants to avoid a situation in which the Australian armed forces’ Boeing CH-47 Chinook helicopters are used for airlifting such cargo.

    in reply to: RAN Selection of MH-60R #2029630
    comoford
    Participant

    That reminds me; has Sikorsky offered the Battlehawk to any other customer or did they shelve the idea after Australia refused it in the first round?

    The Battlehawk is more of an add on kit nowadays.

    MH-60 Sierra – the utility version of the newer Sea Hawks on Libya ops

    http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5027/5576444387_e235a46c02.jpg

    Black hawk
    http://i39.tinypic.com/nxrmed.jpg
    http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/9/8/1/1376189.jpg

    in reply to: International Super Hornet #2372244
    comoford
    Participant

    … but I haven’t read anything I believed to say the Eurofighter was definitely out of it.

    The original source appears to have come from Nikkei, a Japanese financial news service (think Bloomberg or FT). Probably as close to official as a press release by a government or company.

    in reply to: First trials of F-35B on USS Wasp! #2030538
    comoford
    Participant

    http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6100/6310299256_81018651d7.jpg

    in reply to: International Super Hornet #2372953
    comoford
    Participant

    CFT, weapons pod and internal irst
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3h8yImm4U

    Would be great as a small order interim choice for customers who eventually want the F-35. USN (and RAF catobar), Japan, etc

    Narrows the gap with the F-35 and probably puts it ahead of will-they or wont-they Eurofighter upgrade program.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News 2011 June – #2380296
    comoford
    Participant

    Looks like a RAAF FMS purchase of 10 C-27Js is close.

    Australian Gov’t requesting C-27J pricing and production availability for the RAAF

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 94 total)