dark light

EagleSpirit

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 168 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Korea's KF-X: News & Discussion #2125941
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    Turkey can call us up when they have 50W X-Band TRMs utilising GaN HEMT technology. Something that only the very most advanced institutes and companies in the US, Europe, and Japan have. Korea is trying to research these technologies through ETRI in conjunction with Korean companies that have experience in military radars such as LiGNex1 and Hanwha Systems.

    The 30W T/R Module in the second image does look promising but is that GaN/GaAs based or something else?

    in reply to: Korea's KF-X: News & Discussion #2128651
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    You also have to take into account Hanwha Systems is the systems integrator and while LIGNex1 has the greater hardware experience Hanwha has experience with naval combat systems and FCS and KM-SAM with search, track, and weapons guidance to the target. No doubt the KF-X radar will use LIG developed TRMs with Hanwha back-end software and sensor fusion.

    Here is an image of LIG’s TRM technology. Taken from this blog.
    http://i.imgur.com/mXeQJp0.jpg

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2140918
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    snip

    So what are the plans for the BAC in terms of:

    a. F-16 replacement – some rumours of F-35 though not commitment. What sort of numbers. Will current compliment of 4 small squadrons plus OCU be maintained

    b. Training fleet – any news of replacement for SF260 (some quite old) and Alpha Jet

    c. Future of A-109 fleet (currently reduced from 46 a/c to 23 a/c. Initial delivery was subject of corruption scandal).

    d. Allouette replacement

    e. Any other capabilities

    Germany/The EU should hurry up and make a European Pilot Training Centre with Pilatus and Leonardo aircraft + Simulators.

    Considering it’s decreasing costs the F-35 will be a shoo-in to replace the F-16 as long as the US doesn’t do anything crazy with Trump at the wheel.

    in reply to: Korea's KF-X: News & Discussion #2148621
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    What is Korea’s unique requirement ?

    These are all make-work projects. Military Keynesianism at its worst.

    This will be a bottomless money pit and a drain on the tax payer and treasury. And since they are starting from rock bottom with a clean slate design, it will become a political scandal and a national embarrassment just like the F 35 is. Cost overruns, unforeseen problems ect.

    There is no economic reason to do this

    Improve indigenous technology and industry, create a plane with total in-country maintenance and support and one with a free hand to modify and integrate weapons.

    Keep in mind there have been various feasibility studies done with just as negative an outlook so Korea didn’t decide to go ahead while ignorant of the downsides.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2186376
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    Thanks for the clear-up..

    Thus C-103 is the basic design..and further design will derived on that basic design. In sense the basic configuration more or less already set by this design, and further development will be more fine tuning on it.

    This more or less what I’ve gather so far, where Blok 1 and 2 difference will be on systems and avionics. Whille Blok 3 will have further physical difference. Anyway are you sure on 8 prototypes in Phase 2 ? Just clearing up..because so far I got 5 Prototypes in Phase 2..

    It’s last year’s news (December 2015, January 2016) but Korean news media widely reported that KAI was contracted to build 2 structural prototypes (for static, ground based testing) and 6 flight-capable prototypes for a total of 8. The first flight-ready article is scheduled to be finished by late 2021 and undertake taxi tests and other testing before first flight in 2022.

    Unfortunately, there are no readily available English sources but if you put ‘KF-X’ and ‘μ‹œμ œκΈ°’ (Korean for Prototype) into a search engine there will be Korean articles on that very subject.

    in reply to: KF-X/IF-X & TF-X for Europe? #2187323
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    A lot of KF-X media floating around is fan made. I’d like to clear up some stuff about the KF-X’s development and timeline.

    The c103 design was a very basic one meant to compare configurations. Now that the F-22 like low-risk configuration was selected, further development and engineering is ongoing.

    c103>c104>c105(underwent 1/13 model wind tunnel tests)>c106(current)>c107~9(Final, to be finished by mid 2018).

    After c109 there will hopefully not be any major changes and will be the basis of the 8 prototypes that are to make up the test fleet. First flight is to be in 2022 but that may be optimistic. The production of the first 8 airframes will then move into LRIP production of Blk1s by 2025.

    Block 1 and Block 2 will not have any internal weapons bay. The difference between Blk1 and Blk2 is closer to LRIP/IOC to FOC, similarly to the F-35 it’s not about physical changes but software and testing/verification of capabilities. They are aiming for Blk2 capability to be declared operational by 2028 and Blk2s rolling off the production lines to Air Force squadrons. They will aim to fulfil the delivery of 200 some jets by 2030. After that, further orders of Blk2 or Blk3 aircraft may be forthcoming, who knows?

    As a side note, the external Targeting Pods and Jammers seen on the KF-X will be external on the Blk3 as well. Logic being, those are only needed for serious AtG work, and in that use-case (unlike the F-35 which would be the main perpetrator of the ROKAF) the KF-X would only be able to carry a meaningful AtG loadout externally. So there’s no need to worry about stealth.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2204121
    EagleSpirit
    Participant
    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2216594
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    Looks like emergency landing. Plane is in 1 peace, so it could be repaired.

    Uh no. Write it off as a hull loss before it tries to kill someone else. (The experts will decide but this is not sound logic)

    in reply to: Korea's KF-X: News & Discussion #2235717
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    Internalized smart weapons logically assumes targeting and navigation pod integration. I see neither.

    They should be working on integration of standoff munitions like Griffin, SDB, or whatnot. Mk84 is disappointing.

    http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/bbs/view.html?b_bbs_id=10040&pn=2&num=74395

    Thankfully this is also all fan made. So no need to be disappointed.

    in reply to: Korea's KF-X: News & Discussion #2236940
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    Not sure how official this is:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]230761[/ATTACH]

    http://rewreward.blogspot.com/2012/06/armed-with-ability-to-view-graphics-kfx.html

    0% official.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2014 #2244886
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    So they are favoring a twin heavy design that will cost more, be less stealthy, have less sensor sophistication and be more or less on par dynamically with what the US will have built in a greater number since a decade (at that time) and for less bucks…

    Sometime I wonder if all the French Proogramms leader have all emigrated in Asia. πŸ˜€

    1. How so?
    2. That is kind of a big achievement.

    in reply to: What aircraft is this taken from ? #2246656
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    Beechcraft King Air 350ER (Avenger T1)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beechcraft_Super_King_Air

    http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/The-Fleet/Aircraft/Aircrew-Training/750-NAS-Basic-Observer-Training
    (Not the RAF Beechcraft Shadow R1s but the Royal Navy Training aircraft which happen to have winglets)

    in reply to: Why is the Golden Eagle more successful than the JF-17? #2227420
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    With the latest news.. the Golden Eagle will be flying with four air forces, with over 80 built so far. Although its a trainer, all of the export customers have ordered the combat version
    the jf-17, about 50-60 built and in service with just Pakistan.

    I could argue that the JF-17 is the the better performing aircraft with greater potential for combat roles, less restrictions than KAI, but what has been limiting its export success?
    why Koreans can, and Chinastan can’t?

    America/Europe ain’t gonna trust it. China keeps on pissing off Asia. There rest of the world’s poorer nations order irregularly with small numbers. I’m sure eventually contracts will come in.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2013 #2233489
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    As in F-15S, F-15J, F-15I, F-15K, F-15SG……..

    Or – C-130K, F-4K & F-4M

    etc etc…….

    The Russians do the same with the Flanker…… Su-30MKI, Su-30MKM, Su-30MKA, Su-30MKK……….

    Ken

    I must be too much of a Viper fanboy…..

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2013 #2233546
    EagleSpirit
    Participant

    following on. today the contract was signed for 24 T50IQ training and light attack aircraft for $1.1Bn.

    we don’t know the details of the contract… but at the price of $44M a pop, they’d better include F414 engines and SamsungThales AESA radar…

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]223631[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]223632[/ATTACH]

    http://www.koreaaero.com/english/pr_center/cpr_view.asp?pg=1&gubun=v&seq=25666&bbs=10

    according to yonhap. the T50IQ for Iraq is a specialised version of the FA/50.
    http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/12/12/63/0301000000AEN20131212005100315F.html

    For a designation of ‘IQ’ its pretty dumb to have unique names for each country even if they are all slightly different as the names become meaningless.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 168 total)