dark light

halloweene

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,291 through 1,305 (of 4,136 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Strange Air Forces: Royal Malaysian Air Force #2139352
    halloweene
    Participant

    http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/hollandes-msian-visit-reignites-memories-of-anal-sex-subs-that-cannot-dive-eye-on-billion-ringgit-kickbacks-najib-regime-to-buy-us2bil-rafale-jets-after-snap-ge/

    It seems some of the local media do believe Rafale will get the contract at least if the same PM continue after the snap elections.

    On verra.

    It’s not press, its tabloid

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2139539
    halloweene
    Participant

    FWIW, my opinion is that Belgium will probably stick with its co-ordination with the Dutch & buy F-35, with Rafale being the second (& outside) option.

    Scheduled to get tankers for the first time ever, though, albeit as part of a multi-national NATO consortium along with the Netherlands, Germany, Poland & Norway. 2 A330 MRTT on order so far for the NL, but 6 more are planned now that other countries have signed up.

    Agree. Just wrote about RFGP btw šŸ˜‰

    in reply to: SAAB Gripen and Gripen NG thread #4 #2139590
    halloweene
    Participant

    Blast from the past: Gripen E/Fs “secret weapon” is the brand new EW suite, based on GaN AESA:

    https://twitter.com/gripennews/status/558564889669943296

    GaN offers higher output power, and wideband jamming.

    From the picture it seems there are seven(?) units — why so many? Will there be enough distance between them to do anything useful? Or is it useful only when used as sensors and not when jamming? Or do you need that many units to do the “active stealth” trick?

    How many units does Rafale and Typhoon have for their EW suites?

    You need two precisely located (each other) to perform proper interferometry. Otherwise, forwards and rearwards Rafale, 6 afaik DRFMs and emitters are separated) but i should check.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2139752
    halloweene
    Participant

    Bogdan to be replaced by Winter according to Marcus Weisberger. (twitter)

    Aaron Mehta confirms.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2139777
    halloweene
    Participant

    As explained all program information including block 4 details will be provided by the US Government through the JPO so they can share the exact plan that they are going to be moving through the DOD bureaucracy even if some elements have not been formally cleared but are stuck somewhere due to the current vacuum at the DOD on account of a new administration.

    No pun waqs intended. I just meant that preparation phase closes 31st of august.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2139791
    halloweene
    Participant

    Do what, obtain JROC approval? That should happen comfortably by then. When it comes what configuration they offer as a baseline, they could probably bring the first hardware refresh in the block 4 program which would be a part of the IOC configuration with the block 4.4 changes coming pre-FOC. Since the JPO and US Government would supply the block information on behalf of the program (unless it is a commercial deal which would be the first for the program and quite unlikely) quite a lot of details regarding block 4 could be shared even in the odd event that it has not had a full block JROC approval by then. In addition to the expanded AMRAAM carriage, ROVER and other capability the Meteor is also a block 4 weapon.

    Yes, JROC

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2139836
    halloweene
    Participant

    Belgian is a partner in EPAF for three decades.

    Yes, but also sharing air policing with Nederlands.

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2139839
    halloweene
    Participant

    Just get the F-35 and be done with it. Don’t see no reason to host B61’s if you don’t have a believable way of delivering it.

    Interesting point. On the other hand (i) no B-61 mentioned in RFGP (although one may see an allusion inside growth part). (ii) If that was required one day, would Sweden accept a nuclear bomb to be induced on one of their product fighter?

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2139840
    halloweene
    Participant

    so? it was between F-16 owners… since they have chose the F-16, they partnered on that commonality. That doesn’t mean they have to keep buying the same products forever… what’s more, the article says “neighboring countries”.. un EPAF, only Netherlands are “neighbors with Belgium.. Denmark and Norway are a bit further away..

    if we want to go that way, one may say “they partner with France for their pilots training (belgian alphajets are permanently stationed in France for example, and that since 2005 if my memory serves well), they overfly regularly french airspace, train with the french… so it would be only logical to buy the same fighter as the french as well…”

    belgian training is ending up now, new contract with USA.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2139894
    halloweene
    Participant

    On the proposed Weapons growth path the JPO had listed the expanded AMRAAM capability around block 4.3/4.4 so it comes as not too much of a surprise. As I had mentioned earlier the JPO has submitted its block 4 proposal and is currently awaiting JROC approval that may come as soon as the end of this month or early next month.

    Well, if they want to propose block 4 for Belgium, they need to do that for august.

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2139909
    halloweene
    Participant

    CNAMO? I googled it but could not finde anything that seemed relevant? What is it? A kind of simulator?

    Who did the simulation and what was the outcome?

    sorry Cmano http://www.matrixgames.com/products/483/details/Command:.Modern.Air.Naval.Operations.Wargame.of.the.Year.Edition

    Game. Very ood simulator (pro version exist), although not perfect. result was 1 rafale lost, (no refueling on way back)primary targets ok, not the bridge. (one of the two secondary targets). far from perfectly reflecting reality though… And would need a bunch of tests to assess anythin.

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2139937
    halloweene
    Participant

    What does this mean?

    Used CNAMO simulating for scenarion N°2 on Air-Defense.

    in reply to: Strange Air Forces: Royal Malaysian Air Force #2140023
    halloweene
    Participant

    Interesting…

    “There will be the signing of an agreement in the field of defence, and another agreement to establish a platform for ‘Sustainable Agricultural Landscapes in Southeast Asia.

    during Hollande visit tomorrow in Malaysia.

    http://www.nst.com.my/news/2017/03/224785/najib-hollande-discuss-malaysia-france-cooperation-state-visit

    I’m afraid it will not be about Raflae, but…

    in reply to: Future of Belgian Air Component #2140027
    halloweene
    Participant

    Someone tested on Command…

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2140647
    halloweene
    Participant

    Question : is there a recce pod scheduled?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,291 through 1,305 (of 4,136 total)