dark light

halloweene

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 631 through 645 (of 4,136 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2133488
    halloweene
    Participant

    So presently four and maybe 6 for block 4 that’s it?

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2133684
    halloweene
    Participant

    De Briganti opinion is well known as anti-F-35. But he draws number cautiously. did not read the article, but he probbly took some “security” in hese wording.

    in reply to: Team Tempest Future Fighter from the UK #2133810
    halloweene
    Participant

    I believe that NATO members have an obligation to spend 2% of GDP on defence

    There is no such thing as obligation or whatever. They commited to do it in 2024, their own choice.

    Everyone knows Merkel is a Putin puppet.

    really? i thought is was Trump the puppet (sorry for off topic, just a reaction). And Russian gas is way cleaner than US shale gas (ecologic catastroph) etc.

    Indeed, the conference linked here by Eagle is extremely interesting. Any fututre FCAS system (including or not tempest, probably including it) will be a system of systems, the generation gap much more important than present advertised one. There will be ultra LO flying sensors (and maybe first strike air assets), ultra speed (hypersonic) ammunitions, swarms of drones (reusable or not), intelligent saturating bombs, very few control nodes preserving their agility/speed capabilities, very distant awacs etc. The whole being networked and networked with other assets. PAradigm shift mith multirole aircrafts.

    Instead of putting all capabilities in a single asset, the idea is to concentrate the effects of many different platforms on the ennemy asset

    in reply to: Team Tempest Future Fighter from the UK #2134149
    halloweene
    Participant

    Considering the amount of British tax payer money still going into Airbus and the recent interference by Tom Ender’s in British political matters my opinion would be that Airbus can carry on on their own. That comment by Mr Ender’s was a cynical way of accessing more British tax payer money nothing else. Airbus were late on A400M and the Typhoon was a pain to get into flight. I don’t know what tranche they are in UK service now.

    Better to work with SAAB, JAPAN, Boeing.

    Hilarious considering how mauch money Airbus is pouring INTO british taxpayers pockets…

    in reply to: Military Aviation News #2134219
    halloweene
    Participant

    MICA NG program is officially contracted.

    in reply to: Team Tempest Future Fighter from the UK #2135202
    halloweene
    Participant

    That ‘s not what is sketched in recent history. As already said, the level of commitment from many succeeding administration on this subject is remarkable. Ok, we had some fun with the carrier being jump jet then It changed for a while etc… But look at it, this thing is the (end) result of many years of public funding (r&d, test, test facilities…). And it’s a system, not simply an airframe.

    Btw, dassault systemes also own catia.aswell as solidworks. And dassault is main stakeholder of thales. Far from that small.

    in reply to: Franco-German next generation fighter #2136527
    halloweene
    Participant

    Notice extremely small nose either…. multifunctional panels. .. (can be seen on another slide)

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2136531
    halloweene
    Participant

    And how is it related to f35 (except national ranting against nationality of a forumer?)

    in reply to: Joint BAE Systems/SAAB 6-Gen Fighter Program #2139009
    halloweene
    Participant

    SAAB has been working on a follow on capability for the best part of a decade, thats pretty much public.
    The Flygvapnet fields six front line sqns, ordered sixty “E” with a possible follow on order of twelve airframes, not enough to maintain their fleet, that means that the C/D’s will soldier on untill being replaced by… something… circa 2040 (I supose)

    I can only talked about i was told there. And i xas said (asking aout efcas btw) no, no follow on until Gripen E is operational. Whatever public says.

    WAnt a photo in pm?

    in reply to: Joint BAE Systems/SAAB 6-Gen Fighter Program #2139231
    halloweene
    Participant

    Not to break the ambiance, but i spoke one year ago with Sweden Chief of staff and SAAB representatives at swaf fans meeting (can’t go this year, in England 🙁 ). Saab did not think about any fiture plane as Gripen is not yet operational.

    in reply to: Anglo-French UCAV (FCAS) #2139559
    halloweene
    Participant

    About maned fighter, some CGI at the end of this picture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3UtJ6u0QL0 from dassault.

    in reply to: 2018 F-35 News and Discussion #2139960
    halloweene
    Participant

    there, corrected it for you

    Don’t bother… Inanity of the argument speaks by itself.

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2140114
    halloweene
    Participant

    Not dead yet. (let’s hope). But probablu very different. Fr want a stealth drone sensor and bomber, Uk more interested in sensor due to F-35. Different requirements.
    Anw it has always been stated that other countries aprt from DE/FR would be welcome to the party as soon as design is stable enough.

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2140216
    halloweene
    Participant

    , the German MOD is doing the exact same.
    Last edited by Sintra; 29th June 2018 at 18:48.

    Is there any official sentence by the Deutch government? No. Airbus is not in position to offer any participation (neither is Dassault) as they are not payers

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2140262
    halloweene
    Participant

    My ass. Both SCAF and Belgum contract are Gov to Gov (Fr + Ge or x+Be) UK is representing Typhoon consortium, not Fr neither Ge.

Viewing 15 posts - 631 through 645 (of 4,136 total)