dark light

halloweene

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,636 through 1,650 (of 4,136 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2150999
    halloweene
    Participant

    damn those missiles.. serious punch!
    We should be able to see the accuracy, all eyes are on Aleppo now.

    Edit:
    First time i’ve noticed those jammer pods on Su-33

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecTbYTCO9X8

    Did you notice the apparent very slow speed of Kusnetzov for such operations?

    in reply to: World Missiles News #1786147
    halloweene
    Participant

    UK to retire GWS60 Harpoon at end of 2018

    Can’t MDCN/XXXX (forgot the uk acronym) do the job?

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2151022
    halloweene
    Participant

    Btw, accidently learned that some “stealth” US aircraft was shot down during exercises by friendly fires due to the lack of interoperability (L16?). Any idea of the advancement of the future datalink that was to be studied by DARPA in 2012?

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2151108
    halloweene
    Participant

    A400 customers should’ve bought the C-2. same size, better radius.

    And C-2 is able to land on a CBR6??? No tactical capailities… in terms of unprepared/harsh ground, C-160>A-400>C-130>>>C-2

    Which conceptual errors? Precise please, i’ll be happy to have a good laugh. About quality issues, they’re fixed faster than another program i know…

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread 2. #2010832
    halloweene
    Participant

    According to France Info radio, russian fighter crashed while attempting to land on carrier in mediterranean sea. No casualty.

    Edit : Mig 29K http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2016/11/14/Russian-fighter-jet-crashes-into-Mediterranean-Sea-near-Syria/3211479143326/?spt=su

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2010836
    halloweene
    Participant

    Russian plane crashed (no casualty) while attempting landing on Kuznetsov. No casualty.

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2151881
    halloweene
    Participant

    Good news to hear something from the project at least. It might not sound like much, but based on some of the other threads here, the UK and France being able to split responsibilities on a major project is no small thing.

    Absolutely. The Thalès guy also said that work about sensors is doing very well, partly because teams already know each other from old times when they worked together on european active radar projects (GEC Marconi, Thompson and Dassault Electronics). He also said that, if governments would be interested, common technological bricks could be shared for Typhoon and Rafale MLUs.

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2152017
    halloweene
    Participant

    I listned to several roundtable yesterday during a summer event in Paris. They seemed to say that IADS networks are going to revolutionize way of operating planes within a few years. For them it is more the networking of air combat systems that will enable offensive actions than stealth or ECM. Good point for F-35, it is designed to do so.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2152141
    halloweene
    Participant

    5 actually

    At the time of the report?

    in reply to: UCAV/UAV/UAS News and discussion 2015 #2152155
    halloweene
    Participant

    Not really news, but interesting statements from Safran Engines (Snecma) CEO. “RR is our natural partner” and, more interesting, workshare on future FCAS engine more or less decided. UK and Fr share a common view on the consolidation of FCAS concept before opening it to other nations (particularly Germany) (DGA).

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylsU—2kgA

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2152221
    halloweene
    Participant

    C’mon, Hallo, you clearly understand what’s the meaning: the Fr senate cost correspond to a Rafale configuration that hasn’t scored any export sales. It is then irrelevant as a comparative basis for export.

    If you then say that the Fr taxpayer got better deal than the US one, then this is different (I discussed it in length a decade ago on Kovi’s website ;). )

    Sold to Egypt no?

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2152238
    halloweene
    Participant

    If you ever want to keep the credibility you have.. never quote Don Bacon… ever.

    While all of those contracts exist, they are not “additive”. In other words, all the contracts prior to the 03Nov2015 contract were a “modification of” the original long-lead contract. However, the 03Nov2015 contract was the fixed price (ie “not to exceed”) contract that kicked the production off. Also, the “about a billion” from Aug2016 was never a contract and does not appear on the .gov site. It was simply a payment for the 03Nov2015 contract so that production could go on unimpeded since the DoD was taking so long trying to negotiate LRIP9 and LRIP10 together.

    The same type of long-lead with a followup fixed-price contract model was used for the engines (the DoD negotiates with P&W for the engines, not LM).

    The recently announced $6.1 billion is the final negotiated price for that 03Nov2015 contract & any additioanal items since 03Nove2015.

    thx. Btw didn’t know who i quoted. Dunno who is Don Bacon, nvm. Costs are tricky issues.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2152403
    halloweene
    Participant

    I just read this, corrections welcome

    LRIP-9 CONTRACTS : $11,271,778,966

    Lockheed $8,679,012,757
    Details
    long lead time items $822,532,385
    2014 – Mar 25, $698,032,385; Sep 22, $60,000,000
    2015 – Oct 30, $64,500,000
    initial spares $237,765,479
    2015 – Jun 25, $237,765,479
    helmet display system $101,304,341
    2015 – Jul 14, $101,304,341
    tooling & test equipment $526,005,754
    2015 – Aug 4, $431,322,997; Dec 21, $84,434,012
    2016 – Feb 16, $10,248,745
    miscellaneous $572,934,481
    2015 – Aug 31, $430,878,490; Oct 30, $120,555,991; Dec 10, $21,500,000
    2016 – Apr 15, $181,765,203
    modification management $47,514,822
    2015 – Dec 28, $47,514,822
    undefinitized: $6,370,955,495
    Details
    2016 – Nov 3 , $5,370,955,495
    2016 – Aug 12, “about $1,000,000,000”
    —————————–
    Pratt – engine $2,592,766,209
    long lead time items $105,170,571
    2014 – May 2, $105,170,571
    manufacturing $1,038,074,689
    2016 – Apr 11, $1,038,074,689
    initial spares $402,916,206
    2015 – Sep 4, $249,830,014;
    2016 – Sep 16, $136,588,895; Sep 29, $16,497,297
    sustainment $151,770,483
    2015 – Oct 30, $104,290,158; Dec 21, $9,020,915
    2016 – Sep 1, $38,459,410
    miscellaneous $894,834,260
    2016 – Aug 10, $151,664,883; Oct 17, $743,169,377

    All of these contracts can be seen by going to defense.gov/News/Contracts — in the archives by date

    So the real price of LRIP 9 F-35 is : 11,271,778,966/57= $ 197.75 Millions

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2152412
    halloweene
    Participant

    It is probably due to translation from French article.

    http://www.journal-aviation.com/actualites/34883-legere-remontee-du-taux-de-disponibilite-des-voilures-fixes-de-la-marine-nationale

    I have tried to look for the original link in the French senate. I assume that the availability does not include the ones that are under refit.

    It doese, as they mention 39 rafale.

    There you are on website of representative that asked the question.

    http://www.francois.cornut-gentille.fr/2016/11/09/disponibilite-des-avions-de-laeronavale-pas-top-top/

    Edit : official text

    http://www.francois.cornut-gentille.fr/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/20161108-Fra-navy-aeronavale-aeronef-bilan-2015.pdf

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2152417
    halloweene
    Participant

    Don’t take those number by the words. There is a lot of smoke screen in that. Fr Industry can’t afford an open competition since it is considered (rightfully) strategic. Now, arguing that a Rafale cost what the Fr Senate says when public cost of export are showing up is like selling a Renault for a Mercedes*… The AdlA has been taking Dassault and its partners by the hand for years adapting to its only remaining industrial champions for the sake of Fr interests. The losses in capabilities and closed eyes on OP cost are slowly showing up.

    *The Raf, has built originally for the FrAF didn’t meet any success internationally… Hence its price doesn’t matter.

    Once again, showing absence of knowledge. Or do you think official costs from Senate are fake? Comparing with unknown content journo quoted costs? Better continue on Rafale thread no?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,636 through 1,650 (of 4,136 total)