Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jets/Light Fighters

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    It goes back to the issue of why have the army if akk it does is clean up after (or hopefully during) other peoples wars, when there is no domestic threat to security for the last 7 years I've had to listen to people arguing that the army should be disbanded and we could never defend oursleves since we were neutral (never understood how that logic worked), the simple answer I give most of the time is this try disbanding the army/ DF and see how fast the threats rack up. (incidentally there should be a special forum set up to arm people like us for these arguments on ICUN's board in the near future).
    Aidan I'd expect yoou of all people to understand the importance of a symbolic air defence, it means simply that Ireland is willing to defend it's airspace and to restrict it's use by others...it puts a very firm stop to people who might wish to manipulate loopholes to their advantage (and thats more than just military threats you're heading off), also the question of heading off an air campaign against the state, think of how few countries could muster that sort of force projection, a squadron of reasonably capable fighter types that are enough to stand a chane against improvised or low capability aircraft (such as might be made stolen in the event of a NI meltdown scenario) or tackle on any stragglers who got through other countries air defences would be of practical value.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

    Comment


    • #17
      HAWK 200

      The Hawk 200 is a single-seat, lightweight multi-role combat aircraft for air defence and ground attack missions. On air defence missions, the Hawk 200 can attain two hours on patrol 100nm from base when fitted with underwing fuel tanks. In a close air support role, the Hawk 200 has a radius of action of over 100nm. For the interdiction role, Hawk 200 can deliver 2,000lb of ordnance at a range of nearly 300nm when fitted with external fuel tanks. The range can be extended by air-to-air refueling.

      WEAPONS

      The Hawk 200 has eleven external store points with four underwing pylons, an under-fuselage pylon, and wingtip air-to-air missile stations. The range of external stores includes air-to-air missiles, a gunpod, rocket launchers, reconnaissance pod, retarded and free-fall bombs up to 1,000lb, runway cratering, anti-personnel and light armour bombs, cluster bombs, practice bomb and rocket carriers and external fuel tanks.

      The electronic warfare systems include a radar warning receiver and automatic or manually operated chaff and flare dispensers.

      SENSORS

      The Hawk 200 is equipped with a Northrop Grumman APG-66H multi-mode radar, LINS 300 ring laser gyroscope inertial navigation system, air data sensor, display processor and mission computer. The systems are interconnected by dual redundant digital bus. The radar has ten air-to-surface and ten air-to-ground modes for navigation fixing and weapon aiming.

      COCKPIT

      The pilot has a Hands On Throttle and Stick (HOTAS) control system and a wide-field-of-view Head Up Display (HUD). The pilot can select the weapons and release mode prior to initiating an attack by using the weapon control panel, which controls the stores management system.

      The cockpit has a colour display, with a dedicated processor and 15-colour graphics symbology generator. 27 display formats provide flight and aircraft data.

      ENGINE

      The Hawk 200 is powered by an Adour 871 twin-spool, low bypass ratio turbofan engine from Rolls-Royce. The flexible fuel tanks are installed in the fuselage and compartmented integral tanks are located in the wings. External tanks can also be carried on the inboard underwing pylons.

      Click here for printable version


      The Hawk has accumulated more than 750,000 flying hours.


      The current export trainer version of the Hawk, the 60 series, is a development of the earlier export 50 series.


      The Hawk 100 is an advanced two-seat weapons systems trainer with enhanced ground attack capability.


      The single-seat Hawk 200 is a highly capable lightweight fighter aircraft.


      Hawk activating its rocket launchers.


      The Hawk 100 avionic system, including laser Inertial Navigation Unit, Head-up Display/Weapon Aiming Computer and Air Data Sensor.


      A fully automatic Martin-Baker Mk. 10 LH rocket-assisted ejection seat allows escape at all altitudes and speeds within the aircraft's flight envelope.


      The Hawk 200 is powered by an Adour 871 twin-spool, low bypass ratio turbofan engine from Rolls-Royce.





      Advanced Technologies & Engineering Co. (PTY) Ltd - Avionics and Weapon Systems for Military Aircraft (Aircraft, Upgrades and Completions)
      Airtechnology Group - Fans, Fan Heaters, Motors and Generators and Switches and Sensors (HVAC, Fans and Blowers)
      Aviation Spares International Ltd - Military Aircraft and Helicopter Spares (Aircraft Maintenance, Spares and Ground Support)
      AVITRONICS - EW Self Protection Systems for Airborne Platforms (Countermeasures, Electronic Warfare and Decoys)
      CAE - Military Training Systems and Services (Training and Simulation)
      eNGENUITY Technologies Inc - Software Tools for Simulation (Training and Simulation)
      Filtronics Components Ltd - Microwave Subsystems (Countermeasures, Electronic Warfare and Decoys)
      General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited - Integrated Avionic and Defense Computing Systems (IT, Computing and Software)
      Goodrich Hella Aerospace Lighting Systems - Aircraft Lighting Systems (Landing Aids, Guidance and Lighting)
      Heim Systems GmbH - Data Acquisition Hardware (Electronics, Subsystems and Components)
      Horizon - Ground Training by the Royal Air Force (Training and Simulation)
      Mercury Computer Systems - High Performance Real Time MultiComputers (IT, Computing and Software)
      Oxley Avionics - Night Vision Lighting Equipment (Cockpit, Head-up and Helmet Displays)
      Reutech Defence Industries (RDI) - Aircraft Bombs and Fuzes (Air-Launched Weapons, Launchers and Mountings)
      Reutech Defence Industries (RDI) - Airborne and Ground Communications (Communications, Navigation and Identification)


      "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

      Comment


      • #18
        Country of Origin: South Korea Current Status: In Development


        Although increasingly well known for it's ships, cars and consumer electronics goods, South Korea also possesses a thriving aerospace industry. An industry which cut its teeth on component manufacture and licenced production has now produced its second Korean-designed aircraft, the T-50 Golden Eagle. That this aircraft should be a supersonic combat aircraft demonstrates the breadth of South Korea's capability and the extent of its ambition.
        Korean Air Lines (KAL) was the first company in South Korea to be involved in aerospace, establishing facilities in 1979 to carry out depot level maintenance of USAF aircraft based in South Korea and the Pacific. Daewoo, Hyundai and Samsung established similar capabilities soon afterwards. In 1981, KAL was contracted to assemble the Northrop F-5E Tiger IIs ordered by the Republic of Korea Air Force (RoKAF). Korean industry subsequently won contracts to produce a wide range of components and sub-assemblies for Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier and Lockheed Martin - amongst others - and won praise for the high quality of workmanship evident in the delivered items. In 1988, development of South Korea's first locally-designed aircraft, the Daewoo KT-1 Woong-Bee was initiated. This PC-9 look-alike turboprop trainer first flew in 1991 and entered service with the RoKAF in 2000. In the meantime, Samsung was awarded prime contractor status in the Korean Fighter Programme, under which 108 F-16s were licenced-built for the RoKAF. The contract specified extensive technology transfer to Korean industry, resulting in the last 72 aircraft being wholly built in South Korea.
        In 1992, initial design studies were launched by South Korea's Defence Development Agency and Samsung into the development of an indigenous jet trainer/light attack aircraft to replace the T-38, Hawk and F-5 in RoKAF service. The designation KTX-2 (Korean Trainer, Experimental 2) was assigned to the project. Substantial input into the design was made by General Dynamics (later taken over by Lockheed Martin) under the offset agreement negotiated for the F-16 contract.
        In mid 1995 the basic external layout was agreed, but the project stalled at the end of the year as the gathering Asian Financial Crisis mean that available government funding could not now cover the remainder of the project - a foreign partner was essential to carry on. Several major aerospace companies showed interest, but none proved willing to invest their own money. Eventually, Lockheed Martin took the decision to upgrade its existing involvement from that of design consultant to full partner. On 3 July 1997, the South Korean government approved continuation of the project. Later in July, Lockheed Martin signed a formal agreement with Samsung under which it took responsibility for the Fly-By-Wire flight control system, avionics integration, wing design and supply of the APG-167 radar.
        In October 1997, the contract to build and test six prototypes was received - including two static test airframes. Detailed design was now able to proceed rapidly and in August 1999 the external shape of the KTX-2 was frozen, allowing manufacturing drawings to start being released.
        As part of the country's economic reforms, Korean Aerospace Industries Ltd (KAI) was formed in October 1999 from the amalgamation of the aerospace divisions of Samsung, Daewoo and Hyundai. The other major South Korean aerospace manufacturer, Korean Air Lines remained outside of the main industry grouping.
        In February 2000 it was announced that the KTX-2 had been renamed the T-50/A-50 Golden Eagle. The T-50 Golden Eagle designation being applied to an Advanced Jet Training variant, and A-50 Golden Eagle to an armed Light Attack/Fighter Lead In Trainer variant. Final assembly of the first T-50 prototype began on 15 January 2001, and it was formally rolled out on 31 October 2001. The maiden flight was achieved on 20 August 2002, with flight testing continuing until mid 2005.
        The Golden Eagle bears a close resemblance to the F-16 - not really surprising when you consider its origins and the intended role of training RoKAF pilots to fly the F-16 - although it is actually about 80% the size of an F-16. Several design features are shared with its bigger brother, the most noticeable of which is the blended mid-set wing, complete with leading edge root extensions (LERX) and rear 'shelf' fairings ending in F-16-style split airbrakes. Sweepback is only applied to the wing leading edge, and missile launch rails are located at the wing tips. In a departure from F-16 influence, the engine air intakes are located at the fuselage sides, just below the wing LERX in a similar manner to those on the F/A-18.
        The two crew sit in a tandem stepped cockpit equipped with two large Multi-Function Displays (MFDs), a modern wide-angle Head-Up Display (HUD) and full hands on throttle and stick (HOTAS) controls. The Lead In Fighter Trainer and Attack variants will be equipped with a Lockheed Martin APG-167 radar in the nose and a M61 20 mm cannon in the port wing root. The incorporation of many of the latest-technology but 'off the shelf' components and systems within the design is intended to deliver a capable but efficient, reliable and easy to maintain aircraft.
        The Golden Eagle already has a production order for 50 T-50 trainers and 44 A-50 Fighter Lead In trainers from the RoKAF. Further domestic orders may follow, to allow replacement of the F-5 and F-4 in RoKAF service. The type also has obvious export potential - particularly among the ever growing number of F-16 operators. It's manoeuvrability and advanced systems are designed to prepare future pilots to fly the next generation fighters such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Lockheed Martin F-35, while its combat capability allows dual-role adaptability. Potential rivals, such as the EADS Mako and Aermacchi M-346 have yet to secure any orders, while the class-leading but slow-selling BAE SYSTEMS Hawk may have reached the limit of its development potential. With the marketing clout of Lockheed Martin behind it, the future of the Golden Eagle is sure to be bright.


        "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

        Comment


        • #19
          Source: Flug revue (http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRM-346.htm)

          Aermacchi M-346
          Type (Muster)
          Advanced and lead-in fighter trainer and light combat aircraft (Fortgeschrittenen-Jettrainer und leichtes Kampfflugzeug)
          Country (Land)
          Italy (Italien)

          Manufacturer (Hersteller)
          Aermacchi
          Via Ing. P. Foresio 1
          21040 Venegono
          Italy

          Phone: 0039-331/813-111
          Fax: 0039-331/813-152



          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          General (Allgemeine Angaben)
          Crew (Besatzung): 2
          Weapons (Bewaffnung): The M-346 will feature four underwing hardpoint under auch wing and one under the fuselage, carrying items like

          580 litre auxiliary tank (3)
          Mk.82, Mk.83, Mk.84 bombs
          GBU-12, GBU-16 laser guided bombs
          Mk. 20 Rockeye cluster bomb
          BL-755 cluster bomb
          Durandal anti-runway bomb
          rocket launchers
          AIM-9 Sidewinder (4)
          AGM-65 Maverick (4)
          Brimstone anit-armour missile (4)
          30 mm Defa gun pod
          Vicon 18 photo recce pod
          ELT 555 ECM pod
          Power plant (Antrieb): 2 x ITEC (Honeywell) F124-GA-200 turbofan with FADEC
          Thrust (Schub): 2 x 2385 kp (6250 lbs)
          Specific fuel consumption (spezifischer Krafstoffvervrauch): 0,81 kg/h/kp

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Dimensions (Abmessungen)
          Length (Länge): 11,49 m
          Height (Höhe): 4,76 m
          Span (Spannweite): 9,72 m
          Wing area (Flügelfläche): 23,52 sq m

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Weights (Massen)
          Empty weight (Leermasse): 4625 kg
          Max. weapons load (max. Waffenlast): 3000 kg
          Max. fuel (Max. Kraftstoff): 1950 kg
          Normal take-off weight, training (Normale Startmasse, Trainer): 6700 kg
          Max. take-off weight, with weapons (max. Startmasse, bewaffnet): 9500 kg

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Performance (Flugleistungen)
          Max. level speed (max. Horizontalgeschwindigkeit): 1983 km/h (585 KTAS) at 5000 ft
          Stall speed (Überziehgeschwindigkeit): 167 km/h (90 KCAS)
          Max climb rate (max. Steigrate): 20000 ft/min
          Service ceiling (Dienstgipfelhöhe): 13715 m (45000 ft)
          Take-off ground run (Startrollstrecke): 280 m
          Landing ground roll (Landerollstrecke): 590 m
          Range (Reichweite): 1890 km (1020 NM)
          Ferry range (Überführungsreichweite): 2540 km (1370 NM) with two drop tanks
          Max. sustained turn rate (Wenderate): 14,2 deg/sec
          g-limits: + 8 / - 3 g
          Service life (Lebensdauer): 10000 flight hours

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Costs (Kosten)
          In mid-2001, Aermacchi was talking of a price below 15 million US-Dollars.

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Customers (Kunden)
          None yet. A potential candidate is the Italian Air Force.
          Aermacchi sees a market for 600 new tainers in the next 30 years, as the majority of advanced trainers like Hawk and Alpha Jet grow older.

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Competitors (Konkurrenz)
          EADS Mako
          RSK MiG MiG-AT
          Yakovlev Yak-130

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Remarks (Bemerkungen)
          The M-346 is promoted as a new generation advanced and lead-in fighter trainer, designed to be superior to all existing products in its class and to specifically meet the training requirements for the transition to the new generation high performance combat aircraft. It is a fully westernized development fo the Yak/AEM-130, which functioned as a proof of concept flight demonstrator. Changes include not only the equipment, but the new aircraft is smaller as well and many details are simpler.
          The M-346 will offer a high manoeuvrability with AoA over 40 deg. The modern cockpit environment will feature colour displays. Low maintenance costs are also offered, claims Aermacchi.
          Aermacchi has selected a number of risk sharing partners/suppliers, like:
          ITEC (Honeywell): F124 engine
          Alenia Difesa: avionics core system /HuD and three LCDs in each cockpit, mission processor)
          Teleavio/Marconi Italiana / BAE Systems: fly-by-wire system
          Dowty/Microtecnica: control surfaces actuation
          Honeywell: INS (laser/GPS)
          Microtecnica: hydraulic system
          Microturbo: secondary power system
          Martin Baker/SICAMB: Mk.16 ejection seat
          ASE: electrical generators
          Liebherr: nose landing gear
          Secondo Mona: fuel system

          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

          History (Geschichte)
          For many years, Aermacchi collaborated with Yakovlev in tests of the Yak/AEM-130, but due to funding constraints and different priorities in Russia decided to go it alone and rework the design to western standards. This "commitment" was announced at the Farnborough air show in July 2000, where the designation M-346 was introduced and the engine selection made public. At that time Aermacchi said it wants to push ahead at the fastest pace possible. A first flight in mid-2002 and deliveries in 2005 were foreseen.
          A full scale mock-up was shown at the Paris Air Show in June 2001, revealing details like the rounded nose and in-flight refuelling probe. At that time, jigs for the wing were in place and fuselage jigs were expected to follow in a few months.
          Funding is provided by the company plus some research money from the Italian government.
          It will be interesting to see how the programme progresses if Alenia and thus Aermacchi enter into an EMAC joint company with EADS, which is promoting its Mako.
          For now, the first M-346 is scheduled to fly by June 2003. The Italian Air Force will be in charge for certification. Deliveries are possible from 2006, it was said at the Paris Air Show in June 2001.
          "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

          Comment


          • #20
            EADS (Dasa) Mako
            Type (Muster)
            Supersonic jet-trainer and lightweight fighter (überschallschneller Strahltrainer und leichter Jäger/Jagdbomber)
            Country (Land)
            Germany (Deutschland)

            Manufacturer (Hersteller)
            EADS Military Aircraft
            Postfach 801160
            81663 München
            Germany

            Phone: 0049-89/607-23912
            Fax: 0049-89/607-22452



            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            General (Allgemeine Angaben)
            Crew (Besatzung): 2 in tandem or 1
            Weapons (Bewaffnung): As a light combat aircraft, Mako could have an internally-mounted 27 mm gun. It features seven external stations (wingtips, fuselage, two under each wing) for a wide variety of weapons, like:

            4 x AIM-9, IRIS-T or ASRAAM
            4 x AMRAAM, FMRAAM or Mica
            12 x Mk.82 bombs
            8 x Mk.83 bombs
            4 x GBU 16
            3 x GBU 24
            5 x AGM-65 Maverick
            2 x anti-ship missile
            4 x rocket pods
            1 x recce pod
            2 x standoff missiles (Taurus class)
            3 x 1250 litre external tanks
            Power plant (Antrieb): 1 x turbofan engine (possibly Eurojet EJ200 variant or General Electric F404 or Snecma M88)
            Thrust (Schub): 1 x 75 kN (17000 lbs) in trainer variant or 90 kN (20200 lbs) in light combat aircraft version

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Dimensions (Abmessungen)
            Length (Länge): 13,75 m
            Heigth (Höhe): 4,5 m
            Span (Spannweite): 8,25 m (without wingtip missiles)
            Wing area (Flügelfläche): 25 sq m

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Weights (Massen)
            Empty weight (Leermasse): 5800 kg for the trainer and 6200 kg for the light combat variant (earlier figures were around 5400 kg or 5900 kg as light combat aircraft)
            Weapons load (Waffenzuladung): 4500 kg
            Fuel (Krafstoff): 3000 kg in trainer, 3300 kg in LCA
            Design take-off weight (Startmasse): maybe 8100 kg in trainer configuration (was 7630 kg earlier), and 9400 to a maximum of 13000 kg as LCA (the latter was earlier said to be 9170 kg)

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Performance (Flugleistungen)
            Max. speed (max. Fluggeschwindigkeit): Mach 1.5
            Ceiling (Dienstgipfelhöhe): 15250 m
            Take-off distance (Startstrecke): less than 450 m
            Landing distance (Landestreck): 750 m
            Range (Reichweite): over 2000 NM (3700 km)
            g-Limits: +9/-3
            Maintenance man-hours/flight hour (Wartungs-Mannstunden pro Flugstunde): 3,1

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Costs (Kosten)
            Development and flight test with three prototpyes was estimated at 2 billion DM in mid-1999. Price should be 22 to 25 million US-Dollars.
            Earlier, in the autumn of 1997, development costs were estimated at 1,35 billion US-Dollars and a target unit price of 16 to 20 million US-Dollars was mentioned.

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Customers (Kunden)
            None yet.
            Since late 1999, EADS has a Memorandum of Understanding with the air force of the United Arab Emirates for joint studies on the Mako. This was extended in February 2001.
            Earlier EADS (formerly Dasa) had tried to interest South Africa as well as the German Luftwaffe, which at the moment has no requirement. It was also active in South Korea, together with Hyundai.

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Competition (Konkurrenten)
            Aermacchi M-346
            Korean Aerospace T-50 Golden Eagle (Samsung KTX-2)
            Yakovlev Yak-130

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Remarks (Bemerkungen)
            EADS (formerly Dasa) is currently studying an advanced trainer/light fighter, for which type of aircraft it sees a world market of 2500 aircraft over 25 yeras, starting in 2005.
            The Mako concept (until mid-1998 known as AT-2000) includes extensive use of composite materials, fly-by-wire controls, modular avionics and cockpits with state-of-the art colour multifunction displays. Also, the aircraft would possess a degree of stealth, due to its shaping. Life-cylce costs would be minimised.
            A whole family of Makos could be developed, spanning the spectrum from a trainer without radar to one- or two-seat recce versions to a single-seat lightweight fighter.
            EADS and the UAE Air Force and Air Defence are actively seeking partners and suppliers for the Mako, which for the time being are not getting exclusive deals. Among the companies signed up by June 2001 are:
            APPH Precision Hydraulics (Landing gear and hydraulic system)
            BAE Systems Controls (flight control computers, utility control system, flight control actuation)
            BGT/Diehl (flight control computers, mission computers, self-defence systems, training aids)
            Computing Devices (mission computer, displays and controls, stores control system)
            Eurojet/MTU (EJ200 engine)
            FHL (flight control system actuation)
            General Electric (GE414 engine)
            Honeywell (environmetal control system, lighting, life-support system, navigation, hydraulics, secondary power system)
            Snecma group (M88-2 engine, landing gear, gearbox, APU, brakes, wheels, filters)

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            History (Geschichte)
            The original concept for the Mako (previously known as AT-2000) stretches back to 1989 and a joint Dornier/Aermacchi study into future trainer requirements. These contacts later dissolved and Dasa was working on advanced trainer concepts alone. News of the programme first broke at the Seoul Airshow in October 1996. At that time, it was even said that work on a prototype could begin in 1997 for a first flight in 2000.
            At the beginning of 1998, Dasa (now EADS) did a fair amount of analytical and wind-tunnel work concerning the new supersonic trainer. Radar cross-section tests were also conducted, with very good results (1 sq m at 45 km).
            Dasa did cooperate with Hyundai of South Korea and Denel Aviation of South Africa, two countries in which it saw a requirement for a total of 150 new trainers and perhaps 100 more lead-in fighters. First deliveries were then envisaged for 2005.
            Denel built a full-scale mock-up, first shown at the Airshow Africa in April/Mai 1998 to push the AT-2000 for South Africas advanced light fighter competition. This was eventually won in November 1998 by the Saab JAS 39 Gripen.
            In South Korea, Dasa had signed a memorandum of understanding with Hyundai in October 1998, but there was always the problem that Samsungs KTX-2, in which Lockheed Martin cooperates, did have firm government backing. Also, the merger of nearly all aerospace companies of the country did go ahead.
            Further complications did arise late in 1998 with the planned but cancelled BAe/Dasa merger, with British Aerospace less than eager to have competition for the Gripen and Hawk.
            This led Dasa to go to a so called "consolidation phase", but with studies continuing and new efforts to interest potential customers and win partners both among prime contractors and systems comapanies to supply avionics, engines etc. The full-scale mock-up was shown at Paris in June 1999.
            Late in 1999, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with the air force of the United Arab Emirates concerning a possible co-operation on the programme. This was renewed in February 2001 at the IDEX show. At that time, there were also some MoUs with potential suppliers, like Computing Devices, GE Aircraft Engines, Honeywell and MTU.
            At the Paris Air Show in June 2001, EADS did show a fully functioning Mako Cockpit Demonstrator to acquaint interested parties in its modern avionic philosophies. The rear cockpit was a Virtual Reality design with helmet mounted display and data glove to try out alternative layouts. Also at Paris, five more MoUs with potential suppliers were signed (APPH Precision Hydraulics, BAE Systems, BGT/Diehl, FHL, Snecma).
            The launch of the prototype development is now envisaged for the Dubai Air Show in November 2001, with the aim to fly a first Mako prototype in 2005. Production aircraft could then be available in 2008/2009, over a year later than previously thought.
            "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

            Comment


            • #21
              F-5E's upgraded to S standard

              Before the upgrade After the upgrade
              Flight performance data

              Read through the numerous dials and switches from the control panel. Read through the Heads Up Display (HUD), allowing pilot to keep his focus to the front.
              Position determination

              Use of printed maps, compass and ground control information. Inertial Navigation System automatically computes the position with error margin of 0.8 nautical miles per hour.
              Weapons selection

              Involves taking hands off the controls and flipping the switches. Selection through buttons located on control and throttle sticks. Buttons also used for selection of screen displays.
              Weapons accuracy

              Dependant on pilot's judgement and experience. Computer calculations ensure greater accuracy.
              Mission plans

              Scribbled on note pads and changes had to be done manually by pilots in mid-air. Done on computer and fed into the aircraft's computer through a cartridge.
              Digitised maps can be downloaded and displayed on the screens making mid-flight changes easier.
              Back-up instruments

              No back-ups. Two computers and one serving as back-up due to larger space for back-up instruments and fuel level gauges. Ensure fail-safe reliability and higher mission success rate.
              Last edited by Come-quickly; 21 April 2003, 17:50.
              "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

              Comment


              • #22
                wha? We are doing what now?


                Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                Comment


                • #23
                  no way im reading all that!!!!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    CQ

                    What are the unit costs?
                    Meh.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Turkey
                      Yooklid,could you get hold of the AMARC inventory,
                      Give me a half decent laptop and broadband and I can do anything

                      :flagwave:

                      [without getting into trouble
                      NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                      Of course only if I am caught (hahahah) - Pure bullshit of course. I have trouble getting around the internet most times

                      this link may satiate you sir

                      Last edited by yooklid; 21 April 2003, 23:18.
                      Meh.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I wrote a very detailed answer to all your questions earlier but as usual the bloody board logged me out while I was doing it and then sent me flying across cyberspace so I couldn't retrieve my text.

                        Now, Yooklid as Aidan will tell you it's very hard to get a reliable flyaway price for anything but as my memory serves the cheapest options (and the only really worhtwhile purchase yet in service) is the F-5 at around USD10.1m, the Trainer/fighters cost between 12-15m, I don't know how much the T-50 costs but I suspect it may be the most expensive option here, realistically the Hawk and L-159 are something of a placebo for airforces that want to augment their "real" fighters with something cheaper, the benefit of commonality with trainer fleets is a definite selling point as various countries try and sort out their polyglot ORBATTs.
                        The F-5 and M-346 are particularyl attractive for our purposes because of their ftwin engine configuration.
                        The F-20 never went into production as the F-16 had its security status reduced allowing more countires to buy it.
                        Aidan I'd expect you of all people to recognise the political importance of saying (Which entails a degree of doing) "This is our territory and you CAN'T use it without our say so" this is neccessary for deflecting non military threats as well, and the more capable types mentioned here could easily defend against stragglers from battles with our more powerful neighbours as well as defend against improvise dor low quality aircraft that might be used in unconventional or outright crackpot operations against the state, it's interests or it's guests.
                        "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Shit, I write a response while hungover, and theres this many responses?

                          Cool



                          First of all, lets be clear about definition. We are effectively talking about two (or three if we include the F/A-18) classes of aircraft. Theres the converted trainers like the L-39za which have the combat ability of a rabid gnat. And theres the growing ranks of the budget fighter, which stretches from the M-346 up to the MAKO and Hawk 200. Only the upper reaches of the latter market have any real ability, but even then this is very limited. Do a graph. Time to height with two AAMs, a drop tank and full internal fuel. Again, to be clear, not fighters.

                          “Stand by light combat aircraft at Baldonnel would get there a lot quicker than any supersonic aircraft from the UK”

                          Really? Are you sure? First of all, wheres ‘there’? Secondly, are we to expect to have an aircraft ready on the ramp all the time? Good luck with only 10-12 fighters, probably of 1970s vintage. Say you managed it though, you have one plane sitting at Baldonnell 24/7? Oh wait, that won’t work. What if its dark, or raining? And our lightweight ‘hotrod’ fighter can’t even fly? I’d much rather put my faith in a pair of Typhoons, screaming out of the East at M1.5, carrying 4 AMRAAMS and a pair of AIM132s EACH, with IFF, AESA and FLIR running. Unpatriotic, I know. But might works.

                          In the event of a massive slide in world conditions to a world war suitation, we would have ample warning to start running off and buying F/A- 18's and get them operational

                          I love this argument. It slides in the face of experience every time. Lets go back for a moment to the last major European war. People were queuing up to sell us military gear, weren’t they? No, they were not. We’d ‘ample warning’ in the late 1930s as well, didn’t do us a whole hell of a lot of good. We couldn’t beg borrow or steal stuff. We got a few MTBs from the UK, some Landsverk gear and some other miscellaneous pieces. And that’s it. Try O’ Halpins ‘Defending Ireland, Duggans ‘A History of The Irish Army’ or even JJ Lee’s work for details. We’ve been down this road before. The only way we’d have access to hardware, support and training is if we formed an alliance with a major power in the run up to such a conflict. Or if we’d already purchased it.

                          The argument about Culture thing is true though, very true. Probably the single best argument for the purchase of light fighters there is. It’d take somewhere in the region of 5 years (my estimate) for the AC to work up to being able to sustain combat operations with fast jet aircraft.


                          (C-Q, I broke up and slightly rearranged two of your posts to make replying easier, I trust you’ll agree it hasn’t affected the thrust of your argument)

                          Aidan I'd expect yoou of all people to understand the importance of a symbolic air defence, it means simply that Ireland is willing to defend it's airspace and to restrict it's use by others...

                          Aidan I'd expect you of all people to recognise the political importance of saying (Which entails a degree of doing) "This is our territory and you CAN'T use it without our say so" this is neccessary for deflecting non military threats as well, and the more capable types mentioned here could easily defend against stragglers from battles with our more powerful neighbours


                          The problem is that, even with 12-16 fighters, that defence remains entirely symbolic. Right now, we can still say “This is our territory and you CAN'T use it”, a dozen wannabe fighters sitting on the ramp at BD won’t make a damn bit of difference. Most of the aircraft we’re talking about here don’t have the capability to effect even the most rudimentary of air intercepts at any speed or altitude. Do you think we can keep that knowledge from any potential aggressor/transgressor? The MAKO, if it ever flies AND finds a buyer, will be as expensive as a comparable F-16 (16-20million USD in 1997?!?-have a look at any comparable project and see what that looks like in 2003 money), without the outright speed. The Hawk 200 is crippled by range (the airframe is too damn /small/ for a worthwhile fuel fraction) and it plain does not have the speed. The M346 will, no doubt, prove to be a fine trainer, but it has NO radar and no BVR missiles. True, it has a good pwr to weight ratio, but again, range is an Achilles heel. As for the F-5, somehow I fail to see the point of spending millions of Euro putting even quasi modern systems into these small airframes which can’t deliver that gear to where it needs to be to do its job. Or carry it far enough, fast enough or high enough.

                          Purchasing any of these aircraft for Air Defence would be a symbol almost entirely for domestic consumption. Barring the MAKO (which doesn’t exist yet), and perhaps the Hawk 200, none of them could hope to find, track and intercept anything other than a light plane, travelling at medium altitude and speed ON A FINE DAY!

                          capable fighter types that are enough to stand a chane against improvised or low capability aircraft (such as might be made stolen in the event of a NI meltdown scenario) or tackle o

                          as well as defend against improvised or low quality aircraft that might be used in unconventional or outright crackpot operations against the state, it's interests or it's guests.


                          If that’s the only threat we want to be able to stop then a Pc-9 with a .50 cal gun pod will be just as effective. More so in fact, cos it’s a more stable firing platform, with better endurance. And because the maintenance requirements are less, there is a better chance it’ll be available for use on the day.

                          And the money we might have spent purchasing and sustaining an illusory combat capable force of ‘fighter planes’, could be spent on APCs, helicopters, artillery and training instead.

                          Just to clarify, I’ve nothing against the idea of the AC operating jet aircraft in principle, but spending money on a capability which is illusory (at best) serves no one. If we intent on providing ourselves with a air defence capability, we’d have to take a structured, long term approach with a firm commitment for substantial spending. Theres no cheap way of doing this. And we’d end up with a force of approximately 20 medium weight fighters, interoperable with our European allies, with AEW support (perhaps not even our own). Like, say, Austria have plans for.

                          Again though, all of this would require a see change in political attitudes to security and foreign policy in this country. Not impossible, but at least highly unlikely.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Ok, I am out of my depth, but I think what Aidan is saying is making sense...

                            Aidan, I will pm you my own thoughts when I am not at work... :o
                            Meh.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Aidan, you are corect, perphaps I was being a bit OTT in my statement about ample time required to gain the assets needed to survive a major world conflict.
                              I was thinking in terms about the Munich agreement and how a British politican threw his career away to gain another year, to re-equip the RAF to survive the early part of WW2 and give Hitler his first defeat,[one interpetation, there are loads of others].
                              The essential point comes back to the 'culture of air-defence'and the need to develope same, which does not require a full air-defence force, like say some European countries with 180 F-16's in their inventory, but a much more modest force budgeted to do day-to-day defence tasks, but able to train pilots and other crew, both air and ground, to do the same tasks, then head off to the better paid world of private enterprise, but able [and in some cases willing] to be hauled back when the s**t hits the fan.
                              The thing is without this 'core-element' of such a force, all our defence force remain a total and utter waste of time, money, and in the event of a direct attack to this country: the lives of some of our finest young men and women.
                              "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                              Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                              Illegitimi non carborundum

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Actually the T-50 has been fitted with radar and M-346 is hoped to carry one also, especially since there is a running battle to outperform the Yak-130 which is currently test firing PGMs
                                "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X