dark light

Evastun

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: What color is that plane? #2146028
    Evastun
    Participant

    Fine :applause: … at least not DARK green and WHITE.

    thanks! but unfortunately I hate to burst your bubble but Ripe Olive is dark green.

    the official explanation based on
    http://encycolorpedia.com/474c42

    says

    The hexadecimal color code #474c42 is a medium dark shade of green. In the RGB color model #474c42 is comprised of 27.84% red, 29.8% green and 25.88% blue. In the HSL color space #474c42 has a hue of 90 degrees, 7.04% saturation and 27.84% lightness. This color has an approximate wavelength of 563 nm. Sherwin-Williams Ripe Olive – 6209 is a matching paint color.

    whatever it is, it is definitely not a pure grey.

    in reply to: What color is that plane? #2146256
    Evastun
    Participant

    using this scale of dark greens

    it is Ripe Olive

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/6c/19/bd/6c19bd456aa9b044470851483eabbfd6.jpg

    the bomber is

    Brittany Blue

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/d1/37/a8/d137a822fea7203a6c1cffcacaeb49df.jpg

    Evastun
    Participant

    no. Mirage reached all the customers it possibly could have. Maybe India would have bought more.
    the problem with Mirage 2000 was the price.
    a second problem was politics.

    F-16 was cheaper, more available. MiG-29 was a good alternative for countries not on the US sphere. Gripen took up a lot of the middle areas.
    A twin engined fighter to compete with heavier F-15s and Flankers was better because they and the Eurofighters were the only ones dominating the middle to upper echelons. Rafale can get those places that did not want or could not get F-15s, and super hornets, but wanted something different than the Flankers.

    Evastun
    Participant

    if capability was the focus, then out of the two options, I think skipping over the M2000 for the Rafale would be the best. the F1s were capable enough to last until the late 90s when the Rafales were being delivered. the F-8s were still flying when the Rafales were delivered so no real changes in schedule. Actually with out the M2000, the development of the Rafale would probably be much more expedited. Perhaps by a 3-4 years. Meaning CdG, Foch, whatever had their full Rafales by 20000

    but for export, it is clear. the close entry date of F.1, M2K, and Rafale, and overlapping capabilities is why French exports were never as great as Mirage 3 days. I don’t expect them to reach that much even had they removed one generation, but M2K was more in demand for export and suited more foreign air forces needs, and especially budget, than Rafale. continued production and upgrades of the M2K all the way to today (doesnt exist since it shifted to Rafale), would likely mean more exports for M2K.
    its rival would be Gripen. Do you think a late model, still produced, M2K is more interesting than the Gripen for customers?

    exports would have been the same in either scenario.
    the Mirage F.1 entered service in 1973, and in 1974 the F-16 which represented a new generation of fighters, first flew.
    France had no choice but to make the Mirage 2000 to compete with the F-16.

    in reply to: Should the Brits have accepted the Rafale design? #2148059
    Evastun
    Participant

    It would have benefitted both sides.
    The big problem with Eurofighter is the lack of political will to keep upgrading it.
    If France was also part of the program, we would know they would keep pushing it because they would not buy the F-35.
    the Rafale based Eurofighter would have AESA and carrier capabilities, the price would have went down, and Rafale could have gotten the better engine too.
    an E2000 based Rafale would be so powerful.

    in reply to: for the future of the KzAF, pak-fa or j-31 #2184745
    Evastun
    Participant

    i got zero faith in J-31, sod it, unite the hordes, loot Beijing,
    and demand full specifications on J-20 before you leave,
    only then can you make a rational decision whether to buy Su-35/PAK-FA/J-20,
    and do post specifications on J-20 here on keypublishing

    could you explain more about the j-31?

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2184761
    Evastun
    Participant

    wow, omg, what happened to this thread. its all about russia vs china again.

    in reply to: Chinese air power thread 18 #2200971
    Evastun
    Participant

    I’m curious about the radar and its capabilities because the L-15AFT variant is such a small radome. 110km isn’t very powerful, but a very small, modular PESA radar for export as an upgrade package might be inciting for some 3rd world customers. TBH I never expected the L-15 to become an active combat platform. If it was compatible with PL-12 or the simplified SD-10A export variant it could be interested, even if Passive ESA development is a dead end.

    there’s nothing more they can do since the l-15s radome is small to begin with. sometimes radar size equals range.

    in reply to: Mirage F.1 vs Kfir and Cheetah (the Mirage clones) #2200972
    Evastun
    Participant

    Context is very important here.

    The original aim in South Africa was to develop the New Generation Fighter Aircraft System, also known as Project Carver. Once this project was underway, it would have replaced a whole host of aircraft.
    A few years into the programme, it was realised that the Carver would only have come into service in appreciable numbers around the year 2000.

    This led to an interim multirole fighter project called Project Tunny, which resulted in the Cheetah C, with service entry in 1993.
    The earlier Cheetah E programme, an upgrade of existing Mirage III airframes in the SA inventory, was also an interim project to enhance the capabilities of existing airframes, and was nowhere near as capable as the Cheetah C. These Cheetah E airframes were retired in 1992, after being introduced in 1986.

    The Mirage F1 was not replaced by the Cheetah C. The Mirage F1 was the premier combat aircraft in the South African inventory.
    The decision was thus taken, as the premier combat jet, to keep the F1 in service, and when enough Cheetah C’s were in service, the Mirage F-1 AZ and CZ would then in turn be taken into hand for modification to a common standard.
    The intention was to keep the Cheetah C and the “Super” Mirage F1 in service together, with similar systems, until Carver then replaced both.

    On another forum, an engineer who worked on the Cheetah C project stated that the F1 would have received a new nose with radar that was basically the same as the Cheetah C. His development brief on his side of the project was ensuring the digital “glass displays” in the Cheetah C (positioning etc) remain compatible with the intended Mirage F1 upgrade cockpit. Among other modifications to the F1, apart from the new radar and nose, was an air-to-air refuelling pipe, and a bulged redesigned base of the vertical fin similar to that found on the F16. Both Mirage F1 and Cheetah C airframes were fitted with and flew with a turbofan engine.

    The end of the Cold War ended the Mirage F1 upgrade programme, just as it ended the Carver programme.
    The SAAF were impressed with the Mirage F1 aerodynamic performance, and were willing to upgrade the internal systems/avionics to Cheetah C level. It was simply a matter of the timing of external events, leading to massive defence reductions, that stopped that from happening.

    I would posit that the timing of the end of the Cold War probably came at exactly the time when the Mirage F1 was ready for a serious upgrade…but then, as in South Africa, defence budgets were slashed.

    thank you very much for that detailed post.
    in summary, the cheetah and mirage were supposed to be upgraded with the same stuff, but in the end, only the cheetah received it.
    It would seem that this would make the cheetah the more advance of the two simply since it was kept more relevant throughout time

    in reply to: Mirage F.1 vs Kfir and Cheetah (the Mirage clones) #2201190
    Evastun
    Participant

    Dassault gave Israel the blueprint to the mirage. France’s best and most famous jet designer is also Jewish, so no surprise he had sympathies with Israel.

    I’m going to give it to the Kfir because the Israelis shown how deadly it was, and now it has some deadly python missiles to go with it.

    in reply to: only Fulcrum or Rafale for India? #2201679
    Evastun
    Participant

    Fulcrum only for the Gorky
    but quite sure they will be taking a long hard look at the Rafale for the next ship
    it’s a more capable naval jet.

    rafale probably would not be able to take off from a ski jump.

    in reply to: Iran: J-10 or MiG-29? #2201682
    Evastun
    Participant

    Iran has already expressed interest in Su-30SM.

    If Iran wanted to acquire a second platform in the same timeframe then J-10B/C would be an excellent complement, but I don’t expect they will go down that route. They will pursue Su-30SM then take another look at the market circa 2025.

    su-30 is more likely something to replace the f-14s and su-24. not too different from what algeria did with their su-24

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2201684
    Evastun
    Participant

    An event of some note, the last Su-30 has been made @ Knaaz, and production of the type has now ended. It is the last of the 12 Su-30MK2 ordered by Vietnam in 2013:

    http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/bmpd/38024980/3604865/3604865_original.jpg

    -More than 207 planes produced since 1999.
    -6 pre-serials
    -79 Su-30MKK (77 for China and 2 for Indonesia)
    -101 Su-30MK2 ( 37 for Vietnam, 25 for China, 25 for Venezuela, 9 for Indonesia, and 6 for Uganda)
    -20 Su-30M2 for the VVS

    do you know why Vietnam chose Knaapo over Iapo?
    it would seem strange to buy the same model as their main enemy

    in reply to: If you had to choose between Rafale or F-35 #2201687
    Evastun
    Participant

    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/india-unlikely-to-buy-additional-rafale-fighter-jets-mod-source-says

    they should’ve either went all in with the Sukhois or all in with the Rafales. not both. waste of money on logistics and training

    in reply to: Rafale and J-10, which was more successful? #2202108
    Evastun
    Participant

    j-10 looks like it might be a better fighter but I have huge doubts on its multi role capability

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 26 total)