dark light

Dinger

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 224 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: An-3 #2615286
    Dinger
    Participant

    Antonov says turboprop improves payload and climb rate, so if you can make it pay, why not? Janes says there are still thousands of these flying, and that makes sense. A big, rugged, cargo-carrying taildragger is the airborne truck in some places.

    in reply to: MC-130 writeoff in Iraq – WTF, how stupid can one get #2615912
    Dinger
    Participant

    How would this have happened? Wouldn’t the airport’s tower have had to verbally clear the pilot for the runway in question?

    in reply to: Update Air Force scenario: Albania #2617253
    Dinger
    Participant

    Yeah, right. And who is the big aerial threat to the pipeline that the Albanian AF needs Mig-21s to defend against? At best you have to worry about terrorists. Okay. Helicopters are useful in that role. Slow observation prop planes like we’ve secured for the Iraqis, too. Migs? No.

    in reply to: Update Air Force scenario: Albania #2617286
    Dinger
    Participant

    That picture you posted is from the recent report on the Albanian AF from AFM. You know, the report where the author said the AF has two flyable F-7s and has put almost its entire fixed-wing fleet into storage. No mention of Ukrainian upgrades or F-16s from Turkey there.

    Also, Albania isn’t Israel. You don’t get the big bucks from the U.S. without a real good reason. And you know what? You don’t got one. You’ll probably get what you got in foreign military assistance in 02. About $5 million. Try running a fighter fleet on that.

    in reply to: Update Air Force scenario: Albania #2617307
    Dinger
    Participant

    Seems hard to believe all this about the Albanian Air Force when the Chief of the Albanian General Staff said in 2/03, “In the air force the Migs and [Chinese built copies] will go in he near future. We do not plan to have a fixed-wing first-line component; it is unrealistic, at least until 2010. We are focusing our thinking on multirole helicopters.” He said in the same interview that the AF would be about 1,400 people. That isn’t much.

    Also, the U.S. isn’t going to be overly generous in the future. We’ve got our own budget issues in the future.

    in reply to: What's in a name? #2617425
    Dinger
    Participant

    Flannker_man:

    I hope the S-92 gets picked, but the way they’ve delayed the decision makes me wonder. Turning down the EH-101 should be a no brainer from a political standpoint. So why have they delayed if they’re going to go with Sikorsky anyway?

    in reply to: What's in a name? #2617527
    Dinger
    Participant

    Yeah, the ”US-101″ is pure marketing. It won’t be called a ‘Merlin’ either. My guess is that the US version will be “Freedom Copter”.

    in reply to: bring in the axe. #2617580
    Dinger
    Participant

    AP is reporting Raptor cleared to fly again even as the USAF investigation into the cause of the crash is ongoing.

    in reply to: bring in the axe. #2618160
    Dinger
    Participant

    SOC:

    True, AF Magazine is not ‘official’, but it’s pretty close. If the Air Force was feeding Tirpak bad info, there’s nothing we can do about that. I don’t think the guy is printing rumors he picked up outside the gate.

    Plus I think it’s fair to evaluate the F-22 based on internal fuel alone. The stealth capability is pretty much the big reason for its existence and cost, and if we don’t need its stealth on a mission it’s not worth the price. Now if you come up with stealthy drop or conformal tanks …. okay.

    in reply to: bring in the axe. #2618231
    Dinger
    Participant

    SOC:

    If the 595nm refers only to a fully loaded strike mission, the range match is closer. But in that role the strike eagle is carrying 20,000+ lbs of ordnance compared to what, 2000 lbs on the F/A-22? (sorry if I get the numbers wrong- I’m going off a pocket guide to military aircraft that hopefully has the approximate numbers right).

    For the F-22 on an air to air mission, the range might be higher. By how much, we don’t know. Seems to me that the weight difference of the two types of payloads is kind of small to impact the range much. And my impression was that external fuel tanks screwed up the stealth somewhat, but maybe I got that wrong.

    in reply to: bring in the axe. #2618259
    Dinger
    Participant

    With a combat radius of 400 miles, can we really say the F-22 will go deep into enemy territory? Isn’t that about F-18 level and about a third of that of the F-15C it’s supposed to replace?

    in reply to: bring in the axe. #2618636
    Dinger
    Participant

    Even excluding development costs, the unit cost of the F-22 is still pretty high. And it would be priced out of the export market for the foreseeable future. Unit costs of the JSF are expected to be much lower. However, going with the bird in the hand does seem to be attractive at a time when the DOD procurement process seems prone to costs spiralling upwards uncontrollably.

    in reply to: That FB-22 thing … #2618735
    Dinger
    Participant

    If the buy ends up being only 100-180 aircraft, maybe the F-22 ends up being used like the F-117s in a very specialized role at the beginning of conflicts until air supremacy is established. Not what the air force wants, but it seems like even the reduced number will have a role and that might prevent cancellation.

    in reply to: bring in the axe. #2618761
    Dinger
    Participant

    Looks like when push comes to shove, Rumsfeld favors having 500 more JSFs over having 96 more Raptors. Lockheed would rather the Pentagon buy both in large numbers, but they’re still going to do okay out of the JSF deal.

    Dinger
    Participant

    F-18

    i geez are you that slow or do you have crap for brains which results in your slow reading comprehension..

    This is an invitation to flame, but I’ll decline it.

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 224 total)