dark light

drabslab

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 250 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: F-35 News Thread III #2364892
    drabslab
    Participant
    in reply to: US wants F-22 fighter successor ideas #2365476
    drabslab
    Participant

    Exec,

    JSF unfortunately is unsustainable given decreasing procurement buying power over the coming years.

    circles are still round :):)

    Once upon a time, technology was limited and every task required a specialised plane.

    Developing, building and maintaining all those planes was costing too much and training pilots for all different types was a pain.

    Technology got better and Multi role, multi taks became buss words.

    Planes got ever more complicated, difficult to maintain and develop

    The pinnacle of the “one fits all” paradigm proves now to be a bridge too far and the F-35 is under constant criticism of being too expensive to develop, to difficult to maintain, to complicated for pilots to master every bit of it

    and now we start diversifying again. The US are looking at Vietnam style cheap planes (Mohawk, Bronco) to be used in the cas role, modern technologies like laser are asking their share of the budget.

    I think that we are at the end of an area and a complete paradigm shift. Airplanes will not rule the battlefield and the skies above it anymore like they used to do, they will have to accept UCAV, drones, smart missiles, lasers, new ground based weapons in their neighbourhood.

    The country that exploits this paradigm shift the fastest and most efficient might be the top dog for the nearby future

    in reply to: Harrier – Your Thoughts? #2365837
    drabslab
    Participant

    range? altitude of operation? ability to get to action faster? ability to deliver smart weapons like LGBs, evading threats
    like SAMs as well as small weapons fire…

    quite nice summary.

    I keep repeating myself so for the last time 😎 it is a real shame that the UK has been sitting on very good VTOL technology during 40 years and has not invested a penny in the next generation Harrier. Taliking about short sighted:D:D:D

    And now, VTOL is compromizing the design and development of the F-35 fighter, helping to make this such expensive plane that it becomes unafordable… 😡

    in reply to: Harrier – Your Thoughts? #2377420
    drabslab
    Participant

    Heres a quote from Commander Ade Orchards, (and James Barringtons) book; Joint Force Harrier, him comparing the GR9 and the A-10: Pages 228-229;

    [I]”In the new Harrier GR9 the Fleet Air Arm is flying what is arguably the best Close Air Support platform in the world.

    It looks like he only considered jets for comparison. Should things like an Apache helicopter also not be considered as cadndidate for “best CAS platform in the world”?

    Except for flying faster, what advantages does a harrier have over a decent helicopter?

    in reply to: Could the Argentine air force now Challenge the U.K.? #2382530
    drabslab
    Participant

    Could the Argentine air force now Challenge the U.K.?

    Of course it can!!! It did it already some time ago, it was called the falkland war and Argentine lost big time.

    If they do it again it will go the same way.

    During the falkland war the UK has been very nice and restricted itself to taking the falklands back. Today, this may be more difficult which would lead to a much more dangerous situation for Argentine.

    Imagine, no vulnerable troop carriers anymore offloading grunts on the Falklands (and be shot to pieces) but a short visit of a submarine to an Argentine harbor each day bringing the friendly message that they will keep visiting every day until the Falklands have been released…

    Within 6 months Argentine has no economy anymore

    It is relatively easy to make a lucky surprise attack. It is the morning after and the reaction of a powerful angry enemy which is the real problem.

    in reply to: Please can you advise (dH propellor) #1095649
    drabslab
    Participant

    You mean DeHavilland aircraft?
    Which air force did he work for?

    A picture of the propeller would be pretty good.

    yep, without picture (or pictures) this is impossible.

    and an idea of the size of that thing would be nice as well.

    Did he work for the factory itself or for an air force? which plant was it?
    Do you have an idea of the exact date when he got that propeller?

    in reply to: UK to ditch F-35B for F-35C? #2382627
    drabslab
    Participant

    the UK is ditching the VTOl variant and reducs the number of planes it will buy
    The neterlands is reducing numbers…
    Norway doubts…
    Australia is worried…

    The final storylines are being written?

    Weird isn’t it if the f35 project would have delivered as planned all this would not have happened

    in reply to: Future air superiority UCAV #2386589
    drabslab
    Participant

    The classical dogfight is dead for some time the advances of the AAMs in mind. The difference about your description of an UCAV following GPS waypoints and a cruise-missile like the Tomahawk is: The much smaller and cheaper Tomahawk is on a one-way mission, when the UCAVs has to carry a weapons-load to release, survive the whole mission and return to base with the related landing facilities and to work up a turn-around for the next mission or do some repairs from damages suffered.

    why would we need dogfights in future?

    -> flying was invented to spy on enemy positions and soon to drop bombs on them.

    -> dogfights came into being to prevent the first

    Many cheap and small spy drones (flying riding floating and sinking) could change it all.

    in reply to: Future air superiority UCAV #2387243
    drabslab
    Participant

    Many people around here seem to believe UCAV technology will displace manned fighters in the next 20-25 years. I’d like to hear some of the scenarioes people can come up with as far as what these UCAV will resemble and do. Let’s focus on air superiority in this thread; you’re more than welcome to begin threads for other focuii.

    Will they be launched from manned fighters? Will they resemble swarms of bees? Will they be high endurance, low performance flying missile batteries? Share your ideas.

    I see a big future for long range high speed (mach 6) cruise missiles which would be able to react very quickly on information coming from tiny spy UCAV in enemy space.

    These small spy systems will not only fly but also be able to hide in trees, even underground while still receiving/sending data.

    the key will be to protect the satelites and relay stations to send all that data around.

    I don’t see a lot of future for the complicated highly expensive fighters we have today. In a world where anything that is visually spotted can be destroyed by laser there is no room for these huge things and we can’t effort sufficient anyway.

    Also, it seems already very difficult to manage a relatively slow and not so manouvrable predator from a distance. A real fighter would need much more precessign power and awareness of the guy in his bunker 10 000 miles away. This would put a big stress on the communication platform for a single ucav fighter.

    All togehter: I think that the F-35 is not only the latest of the fighters, it is also the end of a paradigm

    technologies in many fields have so much evolved that some creative thinking will sooner or later lead to revolutionary weapons which have nothing to do anymore with what exists today. In 20 years time we may be looking at the F-35 in the same way that we now look at bows and arrows. Still deadly but long overdue.

    in reply to: F-35 News Thread III #2392544
    drabslab
    Participant

    Article excerpt from Defense-Update……

    the deal includes that Israel can put “local systems” in the F-35. I wonder if they have opened pandorra’s box and how many countries will following asking for deviations to the standard F-35

    This way the development of a joint fighter to reduce costs is a bit undermined, don’t you think?

    in reply to: Effective US-Soviet aircraft pairings? #2395294
    drabslab
    Participant

    There is also Egypt with their F-16/MiG-21 combo…

    Not to forget Iran (F-4/5/14, MiG-29, Su-24/25).

    BTW, Poland is in Europe as well…

    and peru is not 🙂

    in reply to: Rafale CFT´s #2396772
    drabslab
    Participant

    Incredible, you found a 9 years old thread !!! :D:D:D

    For the CFTs, no one paid, nothing happened.

    i wonder how much these cft are influencing flying characteristics.

    A Rafale with 2 CFT, 3 big tanks under the belly and two storm shadow missiles

    talking about long range :):D:rolleyes:

    in reply to: Rafale News X #2398569
    drabslab
    Participant

    :rolleyes:

    You said :

    In my answer I gave you the following links :

    The link to MY forum is in my signature, not in my answers. I wasn’t talking about my forum when I wrote :

    I was talking about the links above (Brazil, Switzerland, Greece… South Korea, Singapore…)

    point taken 🙂

    in reply to: Rafale News X #2398581
    drabslab
    Participant

    Good point, however that’s a pretty old story isn’t it? My point is that since Sarkozy is in the driver seat, and from the lessons learned from the Rafale deal failure in Morroco, the export chances for the Rafale have improved significantly, at least that’s my opinion.

    let’s hope so, I find the Rafale the most beautiful new generation fighter (not that that has anything to do with quality, of course) and I would love see a few more flying:)

    besides, EU industry (and politics) can use that success as well:D

    in reply to: Rafale News X #2398637
    drabslab
    Participant

    😀 Just read :
    The consortium Rafale International includes Dassault, Thales, Snecma. It is written everywhere.

    Rafale international is indeed what you say but the forum that you are referring to is not that, it is the “international rafale forum” and as far as i can see it has nothing to do with Dassault, Thales or Snecma

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 250 total)