dark light
Airliner World
Combat Aircraft
AeroPlane
Flypast
Airforces
Aviation
Pcpilot
Air

maus92

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 563 total)
1 2 3 4 … 36 37 38
  • Author
    Posts
  • February 20, 2011 at 3:00 pm in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2339520
    maus92
    Participant

    Navy test pilot: F-35C easier to fly than F-35B

    He also says it feels more solid than F-18 – other pilots have noted it stiffness.

    http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/02/navy-joint-strike-fighter-test-pilot-praises-jet-022011w/

    February 17, 2011 at 1:32 am in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2341978
    maus92
    Participant

    GE is now going to focus on the Senate.

    February 15, 2011 at 3:17 am in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2344396
    maus92
    Participant

    Not Fair to compair F-18E/FE-18 2012 pricing to that hf LRIP 9 for the JSF , the E/F production line is much more mature , the jet less complex . The F-35’s production advantages are when they will knocking out hundrereds in a year , not 9 here 10 there etc etc..

    It’s a fair comparison. The E/F/A-18E/F/G is plenty complex, but you are correct that it is a more mature aircraft. The point is that back when the JSF concept was sold, it was supposed to be less expensive than the Super Hornet. That doesn’t seem likely to happen.

    February 15, 2011 at 2:29 am in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2344462
    maus92
    Participant

    F-35 FY2012 budget prelims

    A preliminary FY12 budget analysis for the F-35:

    LRIP-5 jets (APUC) due in ~2014

    F-35A $193m
    F-35B $210m
    F-35C $246m

    LRIP-9 jets (APUC) due in ~2019
    F-35A $110m
    F-35B $139.5m
    F-35C $150m

    The LRIP-9 jets are very close to full production pricing, according to the source.

    For comparison, E/F/A-18E/F/G FY2012 APUC is $88.5m.

    H/T ARES/Sweetman

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3afe365566-d0ea-41b6-93d2-45420dc06731

    February 15, 2011 at 12:09 am in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2344558
    maus92
    Participant

    Spiral dev impossible for JSF? Looks like its the plan for the future bomber

    “Most importantly, the Pentagon must stick to the idea to gradually improve the new bomber in a block or spiral manner, said the former secretary. Sticking to such plans “has been a little bit of an issue,” said Wynne referring to the Air Force’s move to cap the F-22 Raptor and B-2 bomber buys at numbers far lower than originally planned. If the Pentagon fails to stick with a plan to flied the plane in technology blocks, our next bomber will be based on technology that exists today rather than technology that gets developed in the coming years, he said.”

    Read more: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/02/14/why-so-long-for-new-bomber/#ixzz1DyugTIIY

    February 14, 2011 at 2:56 pm in reply to: Should the UK dump the F-35? #2345215
    maus92
    Participant

    what is needed is that those 3 planes are jointly upgraded, manufactered and promoted for those different roles instead of nationalistic bickering.

    Airbus has shown that European industry can beat all competition when joining forces, eurocopter has become relatively successfull as well, it seems obvious that it is time to get past the small minded local policy issues and cooperate also in the fighter area.

    I’d change that to “European industry can compete”

    February 13, 2011 at 3:43 pm in reply to: Should the UK dump the F-35? #2346049
    maus92
    Participant

    This is the last lot of Super Hornets for the USN. The last batch was more to keep the production line open and until it wins a export order. Which, could include both India & Brazil. That said the USN is happy with the Super Hornet in the short-term. Yet, it wants to move forward with the much more capable F-35C.

    The Super Hornet purchases are not to keep the line open for foreign buyers – the line remains open to fill previous orders and replace worn out airframes not replaced by the much delayed F-35C. The international model is potentially even more capable than the already impressive -E/F – if it receives any orders. It also reduces risk if the -C isn’t carrier qualified / fails flight test for some reason. And if the -B dies on the vine and the Marines are allowed to keep fast jets, -F’s should be purchased for the FAC-A mission. Super Hornets will be around until 2030 or so, regardless of the amount of F-35’s eventually procured.

    February 13, 2011 at 1:24 pm in reply to: F-35B – If it get's cancelled #2011572
    maus92
    Participant

    This is actually a good idea, as it shortens the disruption to air operations compared to a conventional UNREP, which even a CVN has to do every 2-3 days during combat operations.

    The CVN has to shut down air ops (save for supply/rescue helos) during the several-hour approach/line hook-up/transfer/de-rig/separate cycle, while the LHA/LHD could continue air ops even during the LCAC arrival/unload/departure cycle.

    The supplies could be transferred from the AOR or other supply ship either to the LPD/LSD or directly into the LCAC without disrupting the LHA/LHD operations… meaning that the LHA/LHD need onbly break from operations for replenishing the ship & aviation fuel stores, not for other re-supply functions.

    The implication here is that the CVN would be useless during UNREP – not necessarily true in all cases. A single CVN may or may not have to cease flight ops while being replenished, but in a war scenario, multiple CVN’s are certain to be deployed. The CVN’s would most likely set up an operational rotation of 12 hour on station, 12 hours off station, and within the off hours, replenish fuel, ammunition, food, etc.

    February 11, 2011 at 3:18 pm in reply to: F-35B – If it get's cancelled #2011741
    maus92
    Participant

    The F-35B then doesn’t cripple the JSF design dimensions. And the USN and USAF get what they originally wanted.

    Unfortunately the damage has already been done. The -B requirements dictated the design of the -A and -C models. Dumping the -B only helps in the sense that development efforts (and funding) can be focused on tweaking the less risky models. Deriving a twin engined and 2-crew cockpit aircraft (a true naval aircraft) from the F-35 is unlikely to happen.

    February 11, 2011 at 3:12 pm in reply to: F-35B – If it get's cancelled #2011750
    maus92
    Participant

    They were only able to do that because of prior logistics buildup in Kuwait. If the logistics in Kuwait didn’t exist and had to be brought to the Marines ashore directly from ship, the Gators would have been too busy with Frogs and Stallions to waste deck space on Harrier operations.

    The bottom line is the reason for the B is to protect turf — STOVL capability. But when you step back, look at the big picture and ask “What is the best method for fire support of Marines ashore?”, the answer is artillery owned by the Battalion.

    • Can STOVL provide fire support within 30 seconds? No, but arty can.
    • Can STOVL be there 24/7/365? No, but arty can.
    • Can STOVL provide fire support at 2 or 3 different locations simultaneously? No, but arty can.
    • Can STOVL deliver precision HE? Switch to DPICM? Then smoke? Then illumination? Then mines? No, but arty can.

    +1

    February 11, 2011 at 3:10 pm in reply to: F-35B – If it get's cancelled #2011754
    maus92
    Participant

    Can’t operate at sea. Though there is a requirement for an AV-609 for the v-22 escort role.

    I’d like to see some sea trials – that would be interesting.

    The Marines say they need down in the dirt CAS and austere basing options – both could be satisfied by either the ST or AT-6B. Sea basing is a nice to have option, but first-day(weeks really)-of-war strikes would be flown by Navy and USAF aircraft. Using F-35B’s (or any stealth aircraft) for CAS is a ridiculous waste of money.

    February 11, 2011 at 1:05 am in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2348142
    maus92
    Participant

    F-35 and spiral development

    Solving F-35 development woes will be difficult but achievable. What should have been done:

    “Another handicap is that such a program comes along so infrequently and in such long cycles that it is almost impossible to avoid the operational push to put everything in the first version. What Kaminski recommends instead are programs with block upgrades like the F-16.”

    H/T ARES/Fulghum

    http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a55590fb8-2da7-4769-9827-920983076d87

    February 11, 2011 at 12:45 am in reply to: F-35B – If it get's cancelled #2011849
    maus92
    Participant

    Well if that’s the case, an awful lot of money seems to be being spent on providing the USMC with 4-6 fighters, don’t you think?

    Bingo!

    February 10, 2011 at 4:21 pm in reply to: Should the UK dump the F-35? #2348433
    maus92
    Participant

    Gripen:
    Strengthened airframe
    Strengthened landing gear with dual nose gear though it does retract backwards.
    higher mounted wing and intakes
    candards mounted in place that does not reduce deck visibility.

    In other wards, in order to make it better suited for unprepared runways, SAAB already did some of the work.

    Can the Gripen withstand the stress imposed on the airframe via the hook in arrested landings? Was it designed with a keel?

    February 8, 2011 at 5:36 am in reply to: Someone Besides Hot Dogs's F-35 Cyber News Thread #5 #2349873
    maus92
    Participant

    For the past 20 years, the USN had to rely upon the NRO and USAF for reconnaissance/targeting data. With UCLASS, the CSG can provide persistent recce within 1500 miles of any ocean while USAF is struggling to find a friendly country with suitable basing for its RQ-4s. Score USN 1, USAF 0.

    F-14B TARPS? RF-8’s?

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 563 total)
1 2 3 4 … 36 37 38