A Singapore aircraft-carrier?
-
currently .....arent u folks having great difficulty in getting more apaches?f-35??f-uk?
u would be lucky just trying to get a propeller powered plane from the way things are handled now.
the f-35 will only last 5 years after being bought by u folks and then be considered as obsolerte.they are currently designing and building the f-55.
-
The AFP report of the Russian-Mistral interest...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090826/bs_afp/russiafrancedefencemilitary_20090826193425
-
With the long range of F15 SG and our air tankers,
we dunt need CV lah...
2.CV,if not properly protected,is just a potentail huge floating coffin.
CV of Japan WW2 shows a good lessons.
How do we know the protections is not enough?
Until the CV is sunk then we know.
Boys,SG is not the World Police like Uncle Sam.
Our potential targets is not so far away.We try to be friend with everyone,
until we really cannot take the bullying.
So,Like they say,
Laymen talks weapons.Experts talks logistics.
$$$$$$$$$$
some one hacked into my account and replaced the photo...
-
As the news gets earlier, the price keeps going down.
-
Originally posted by HITMAN11111111111:
VERY AMUSING INDEED!
it appears spore is now filled with hot air balloons without the hot air!
how do you kind people expect to build anything when none of you here have ever welded metal together or dealt with high tech manufacturing methods.i suppose u want it to be delivered like your cars or jetplanes.it wont be cheap just to buy some bunch of metal welded to one another or concrete etc .
Now hang on just a minute. Do NOT tar the entire community because of a few misguided fools. -
Originally posted by Obersturmfuhrer:
Now hang on just a minute. Do NOT tar the entire community because of a few misguided fools.It normally takes a fool to know one.
More views on the Russian "surprise"
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Russia-to-Order-French-Mistral-LHDs-05749/
-
Japan now looking to build larger carrier than the "helo carrying"hyugas...
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnavai/articles/20090904.aspx
-
Originally posted by weasel1962:
It normally takes a fool to know one.
More views on the Russian "surprise"
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Russia-to-Order-French-Mistral-LHDs-05749/
I wonder if this is the start of consolidating global arm manufacturers ? -
If rsaf does acquire F-35Bs, this may result in rsaf pilots having a chance to take off from USN CVNs or amphibs....
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/09/navy_marine_jsf_091309w/
-
How did u say JSF is so good?
any actual tests have been done?dunt tell me any computer simulations rubbish
stuff.
since it can fly,can the manufactuer and owners prove it by actual fighting
and dog fights....
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
How did u say JSF is so good?
any actual tests have been done?dunt tell me any computer simulations rubbish
stuff.
since it can fly,can the manufactuer and owners prove it by actual fighting
and dog fights....
In the Falklands War, twenty-six British Av-8B Harrier Jump Jets from HMS Hermes and Invincible took on the entire Argentinian Air Force, and in the air battles had shot down 4 in dogfights.It saw action in Bosnia, and - with other NATO aircraft types deployed - had kept the Yugoslavian Air Force out of the theatre of war.
It appeared again in both the 1993 and 2002 invasions of Iraq, and continue to see combat action in Afghanistan with the RAF and the US Marines deployed.
The design of the F35B is intended to be better then the Av-8B, and its choice of engine power for the first VSTOL supersonic flight has already proven its point.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
In the Falklands War, twenty-six British Av-8B Harrier Jump Jets from HMS Hermes and Invincible took on the entire Argentinian Air Force, and in the air battles had shot down 4 in dogfights.It saw action in Bosnia, and - with other NATO aircraft types deployed - had kept the Yugoslavian Air Force out of the theatre of war.
It appeared again in both the 1993 and 2002 invasions of Iraq, and continue to see combat action in Afghanistan with the RAF and the US Marines deployed.
The design of the F35B is intended to be better then the Av-8B, and its choice of engine power for the first VSTOL supersonic flight has already proven its point.
There were actually 2 types of harriers, the FRS and GR.3s, serving in the falklands. The sea harrier FRS Mk 1s were the only ones doing CAP and thus engaged in A2A. What makes it amazing is that, it wasn't the full complement of FRS at start (reinforcement later via South Georgia). The Sea Harrier FRS shot down 21 or more for no A2A loss and earned the reputation as the "black death".
If one is really interested in the falklands war, I would suggest Martin Middlebrook's 2 books on the Falklands war. The first entitled the Falklands war and the second entitled the Malvinas which depicted the war from the british POV in the former and the Argentine pov in the latter giving a well-rounded account of the battle.
As you have mentioned, the F-35B will also be the first STOVL aircraft capable of supersonic speeds. Whilst the F-35B (and all other variants) is superior in terms of power output, TW ratio and will utilise later technology compared to the aircraft it is designed to replace, there is no need to justify its superiority. If it is not superior, no air force will procure it no matter what anyone else says.
-
Originally posted by weasel1962:
There were actually 2 types of harriers, the FRS and GR.3s, serving in the falklands. The sea harrier FRS Mk 1s were the only ones doing CAP and thus engaged in A2A. What makes it amazing is that, it wasn't the full complement of FRS at start (reinforcement later via South Georgia). The Sea Harrier FRS shot down 21 or more for no A2A loss and earned the reputation as the "black death".
If one is really interested in the falklands war, I would suggest Martin Middlebrook's 2 books on the Falklands war. The first entitled the Falklands war and the second entitled the Malvinas which depicted the war from the british POV in the former and the Argentine pov in the latter giving a well-rounded account of the battle.
As you have mentioned, the F-35B will also be the first STOVL aircraft capable of supersonic speeds. Whilst the F-35B (and all other variants) is superior in terms of power output, TW ratio and will utilise later technology compared to the aircraft it is designed to replace, there is no need to justify its superiority. If it is not superior, no air force will procure it no matter what anyone else says.
You are right with the updates.From information gleaned from the reference site at - ‘British Air Services in the Falklands War’ (*1) - the following is extracted:
No. 800 NAS - Sea Harrier FRS.1; 12 Nos deployed, 2 lost - HMS Hermes
No. 801 NAS - Sea Harrier FRS.1, 8 Nos deployed, 4 lost - HMS Invincible
No. 809 NAS - Sea Harrier FRS.1, 8 Nos deployed - HMS Hermes & Invincible
No. 1(F) Squadron - Harrier GR.3 - 10 Nos deployed, 4 lost - HMS Hermes & from Port San Carlos.
In all, the Sea Harrier FRS.1 flew 1,435 sorties and scored 20 (+3) kills with 6 lost, and the Harrier GR.3 flew 126 sorties with 4 lost - none of the losses were attributed to combat, and were very much due to the atrocious weather conditions that caused human errors.
This is a remarkable achievement when one considers that the Harrier was first developed in the 1960s, and entered combat 20 years later in 1982.
The JSF F35B will surely supercede the revolutionary designs of the Harrier.
NAS refers to Naval Air Squadron
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
You are right with the updates.From information gleaned from the reference site at - ‘British Air Services in the Falklands War’ (*1) - the following is extracted:
No. 800 NAS - Sea Harrier FRS.1; 12 Nos deployed, 2 lost - HMS Hermes
No. 801 NAS - Sea Harrier FRS.1, 8 Nos deployed, 4 lost - HMS Invincible
No. 809 NAS - Sea Harrier FRS.1, 8 Nos deployed - HMS Hermes & Invincible
No. 1(F) Squadron - Harrier GR.3 - 10 Nos deployed, 4 lost - HMS Hermes & from Port San Carlos.
In all, the Sea Harrier FRS.1 flew 1,435 sorties and scored 20 (+3) kills with 6 lost, and the Harrier GR.3 flew 126 sorties with 4 lost - none of the losses were attributed to combat, and were very much due to the atrocious weather conditions that caused human errors.
This is a remarkable achievement when one considers that the Harrier was first developed in the 1960s, and entered combat 20 years later in 1982.
The JSF F35B will surely supercede the revolutionary designs of the Harrier.
NAS refers to Naval Air Squadron
You're right. There's 2 elements that also has to be taken into account.
(a) missile availability
UK pleaded at the start of the war and US released from its stock, the AIM-9L which UK didn't have and allowed offbore sight shooting (ie all aspect).
The Argentines had the R530 missile for its Mirage IIIs which outranged the AIM-9s but never managed to employ it.
In contrast, Argentina had already ordered many exocets but started the war without securing the stocks first (and ended up only using its pre-war stock of 5). France never released the remaining exocets. If the argentines had the stock, it could have been a war winner.
That's a lesson for the rsaf but the rsaf already has better missiles in its inventories (eg AIM-120C7 and AIM-9X) for the F-15/F-16 than its potential adversaries. If needed and available, there is no reason why the AIM-120D could not also be released if rsaf requested.
(b) pilot/mechanics training
The argentine pilots didn't know how to maximise pk for its missiles fired eg Shafrirs (which the Israelis knew how). Even in terms of bomb release, they released it too low without factoring in safety fuze heights resulting in UXBs (unexploded bombs).
Singapore's investment into pilot training is very, very high and pilot selection very rigorous. That's a major plus even with current aircraft.
---------------------------------
Other factors:
The F-35A/B/C, because of its stealth characteristics and better performance, will nevertheless allow wider weapons envelopes ie easier to shoot and shoot first for its missiles.
The F-35's EW/ECCM is equal or superior to existing aircraft's. Coupled with increased flight awareness (due to employment of distributed apertures) makes it less vulnerable.
CV based aircraft of course will increase the employment envelopes of the aircraft ie not tied to fixed runways, etc.
Too much other factors not stated to post in one post. Wasting time to rehash.
-
UK training AH-64 pilots on its CVs. Reinforces the CV as a training platform as well not just for jet planes but also rotorcraft...
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htnavai/articles/20091006.aspx
-
Deleted
-
India
-
lol. Shotgun, just ignore the trolling ignoranus.
There are illiterate a**holes on every board who won't bother to read the thread then come up with ill-thought insults. He's just gunning for a troll-fight. I won't even bother.
-
Dude by all means just delete all close threads created by trolls or idiots to maintain thread integrity.
-
Russia- French mistral acquisition closer to a deal.
-
Mistral arrives in St Petersburg for russian review.
-
From the ultra-right news org, concerns from neighbouring countries over the potential mistral sale. No opposition from US senior officials...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,577345,00.html?test=latestnews
-
Ahh.. the mighty Russian Navy, having to buy French warships now. Maybe they might start acquiring Rafales too.
-
Instead of an aircraft carrier, an amphibious assault ship is better as it is smaller, cheaper and also requires smaller manpower capacity.
Seen here is an American amphibious assault ship, USS Bataan..
-
Originally posted by rAMIRez32str:
Instead of an aircraft carrier, an amphibious assault ship is better as it is smaller, cheaper and also requires smaller manpower capacity.
Seen here is an American amphibious assault ship, USS Bataan..
While both the aircraft carrier and amphibious assault ship will allow the US to project its force, each vessel has completely different roles and operating capabilities.
In an intense theatre of war, the amphibious assault ship will enable ground troops to be landed to take possession of territories, and with any limited air assault assets that they carry to allow themselves some control of the immediate air space.
Unfortunately, in the face of more potent threats from enemy airborne assets, it is unlikely that the amphibious assaut ship has the means to handle such potent threats - which can be better handled by the high performance naval air assault assets, and electronic warfare suites that are found only on an aircraft carrier.
Such superior air assault assets from the aircraft carrier will offer highly potent abilties to suppress enemy air and ground assets that attempt to control their air space, and deny freedom of movement to friendly forces.