Thanks Thanks:  236
Likes Likes:  447
Dislikes Dislikes:  7
Page 15 of 21 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 505
  1. #351
    Lieutenant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    And to think that $800m is just the MDE cost of the 14 aircraft. Nevertheless $57m MDE for a Viper 70 is pretty reasonable.

    Sounds as though the Slovakians got some discounting since the original State Department notification.

    https://dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/sl...ation-aircraft

    It may pay the Bulgarians to do the same. I believe they have been startled by the telephone book numbers coming back to them after their request for just 8.

    https://dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/bu...rcraft-support
    I think the Bulgarian President is happy he vetoed the purchase of the F16's, Lockheed are taking the p*ss with some of their pricing. There should be no way an F16 should cost anywhere near an F35 or more if you look at some recent deals.

  2. #352
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    I think the Bulgarian President is happy he vetoed the purchase of the F16's, Lockheed are taking the p*ss with some of their pricing. There should be no way an F16 should cost anywhere near an F35 or more if you look at some recent deals.
    It is not all LM's doing, the MDE cost of the proposed Bulgarian airframes are possibly not dramatically different to the Slovakian deal. A lot has to do with the steep prices from other suppliers of the capability - namely in munitions, ECM/EW and other avionics plus training and support over a number of years. That is where the fiscal pain really is and why a basic rule of thumb is whatever is the MDE / GWS cost of the airframe one must at least double it to get the operative capability cost.

    Once KAI is cleared by LM their development partners (whom are withholding AESA permission to protect the F-16 market) to allow the Elta's ELM/2052 AESA radar instead of the current ELM/2032 on the proposed FA-50 Block 20 (with conformal tank, A2AR, Sniper, the F-414 engine upgrade option, Link 16 and BVR) then the F-16V will come under real costing pressure in the market from a much cheaper but capable modern competitor in a number of markets such as South East Asia, Eastern and Central Europe and South America, whom will possibly decide that it is better to have a full squadron capability from FA-50 B20's or a short Squadron of F-16V's for the same kind of capability outlay - and the flexibility to incorporate Israeli tech and munitions instead of US. The Koreans are aiming for under 50B won (€38m) for the Block 20 with AESA in the market. LM are trying to have their cake and eat it.

  3. Likes meridian liked this post
  4. #353
    Lieutenant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    It is not all LM's doing, the MDE cost of the proposed Bulgarian airframes are possibly not dramatically different to the Slovakian deal. A lot has to do with the steep prices from other suppliers of the capability - namely in munitions, ECM/EW and other avionics plus training and support over a number of years. That is where the fiscal pain really is and why a basic rule of thumb is whatever is the MDE / GWS cost of the airframe one must at least double it to get the operative capability cost.

    Once KAI is cleared by LM their development partners (whom are withholding AESA permission to protect the F-16 market) to allow the Elta's ELM/2052 AESA radar instead of the current ELM/2032 on the proposed FA-50 Block 20 (with conformal tank, A2AR, Sniper, the F-414 engine upgrade option, Link 16 and BVR) then the F-16V will come under real costing pressure in the market from a much cheaper but capable modern competitor in a number of markets such as South East Asia, Eastern and Central Europe and South America, whom will possibly decide that it is better to have a full squadron capability from FA-50 B20's or a short Squadron of F-16V's for the same kind of capability outlay - and the flexibility to incorporate Israeli tech and munitions instead of US. The Koreans are aiming for under 50B won (€38m) for the Block 20 with AESA in the market. LM are trying to have their cake and eat it.
    KAI have a product that really could be the F5 of today, the Golden Eagle family even as they stand today offer a cheaper alternative for air policing etc than full war fighting fighters. One could have 3-4 FA-50s for the price of a Eurofighter et al. Can't wait to see if and when they get to offer the Block 20.

  5. #354
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    KAI have a product that really could be the F5 of today, the Golden Eagle family even as they stand today offer a cheaper alternative for air policing etc than full war fighting fighters. One could have 3-4 FA-50s for the price of a Eurofighter et al. Can't wait to see if and when they get to offer the Block 20.
    In fact it is the modern take of A-4 Skyhawk as well as the F-5 because it has great A2G capabilities and will soon integrate the Taurus KEPD-350 K2 for Block 20 in the maritime strike role. KAI-LM did a lot of development work on the FA-50 Fighting Eagle in preparation for the USAF T-X competition such as the DART hump and A2A probe, AN/USQ-140 (V) Link 16 Data Link Terminal and AN/AAQ-33 Sniper. Unfortunately for KAI, the Boeing-Saab T-X offering was less capable but significantly cheaper and therefore won the T-38 replacement contract. Of course all that work will now translate over to the Block 20, with the Block 10 essentially being the Block 0 FA-50 with AN/AAQ-33 Sniper.

    The RoKAF report low maintenance man-hours per flight hour (MMH/FH) of 5.2 with their current FA-50 fleet and a US$5500 operational cost per flight hour (OCP/FH) which is a third of the KF-16 in RoKAF service. The other interesting fact is that the aircraft was designed for an annual flight utilization rate of up to 360 hours per annum over a 25 year period with an airframe lifespan of 8500 hours. This higher annual utilization rate is well in excess of other combat aircraft such as the F-16 or F-18 in which 250 hours p.a is regarded as heavy utilization. Note though if the airframe was used in a strictly combat role its real world annual utilisation rate would be 1/3 less due to likely greater wing loadings.

    As for range. Originally this was where the T-50/FA-50 range was poor. However, with both 2 x 150 gallon drop tanks and the 152 gallon DART hump tank would provide for an increase in operational range, increase in endurance and an increase in CAP mission time. I don't have the combat range figures but the ferry range with drop tanks and DART gets out to a respectable 3750km. And of course the DART tank can take boom refuelling and from the T-X has come the probe and drouge capability.

    The other issue that the Block 20 hopes to resolve was essentially the underwhelming climb and turn retardation using the standard F-404-102 of the FA-50 with just 17,000 lb of thrust. The option that KAI will offer to customers an upgraded to the more powerful yet efficient F-414-KI which produces 22,000 lb of thrust will solve that considerably.

    But to really be a contender / survivor in the air combat space it does need the AESA radar at the sharp end.

  6. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
  7. #355
    Lieutenant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,280
    Post Thanks / Like
    The T-50 family is very similar to the T38/F5 family both of which were developed from the N156. Trainer, ground attack and low cost fighter. Also the FA-50 could be seen as a cheaper version of the JAS39, not as capable but a lot cheaper to buy and similar running costs. Both are roughly the same dimensions and share engines. It would have been interesting if KAI had continued to develop the single seater... but the KF-X takes all their effort. Will be interesting to see that when it is finished.

    The 12 a/c that the PAF got cost $420m, so $35m a copy is a hard price to beat, let's see what an armed version of the Boeing/Saab TX will cost.

  8. Thanks Anzac, Turkey thanked for this post
    Likes Graylion liked this post
  9. #356
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,697
    Post Thanks / Like
    NATO’s interception process
    https://twitter.com/nato/status/719491986252636161?s=21

    Estonia’s new air ops control centre
    https://news.err.ee/1022955/gallery-...ter-in-tallinn

  10. Thanks Flamingo thanked for this post
  11. #357
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,714
    Post Thanks / Like
    Something from a former AC commander on providing Air Defence for Ireland:
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...says-1.4184846

  12. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, Tempest liked this post
  13. #358
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,785
    Post Thanks / Like
    https://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...ld-983986.html

    Similar report from the same event from a different source. Must be embarrassing to be a minister for defence at this event and have experts from all over on stage telling how we are doing Defence wrong.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  14. #359
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,714
    Post Thanks / Like
    To be fair, everyone has known the area of air security has always been an utter disaster long before FG get into power.

  15. Likes DeV liked this post
  16. #360
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,785
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ever since we replaced the sea fires with vampires we have been downgrading our air defence capability. We went from the equivalent of the F16 of its day to a 1st gen jet trainer, which we replaced with.... a 1st gen jet trainer that didnt have ejector seats. More recently replacing that with a turbo prop trainer with ejector seats. It's like we have maintained vigorously our 1950s level of capability.
    It is great to see the discussion is being had by experts in the field. The required investment is scary though.
    It would take at least a billion, today to get us in the game, including primary radar operated by Air Corps.
    That's before you consider where the staff will come from. Consider the logs trail, and the extra staff this capability growth would require.
    How do Finland manage?
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  17. Thanks X-RayOne thanked for this post
  18. #361
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,714
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Ever since we replaced the sea fires with vampires we have been downgrading our air defence capability. We went from the equivalent of the F16 of its day to a 1st gen jet trainer, which we replaced with.... a 1st gen jet trainer that didnt have ejector seats. More recently replacing that with a turbo prop trainer with ejector seats. It's like we have maintained vigorously our 1950s level of capability.
    It is great to see the discussion is being had by experts in the field. The required investment is scary though.
    It would take at least a billion, today to get us in the game, including primary radar operated by Air Corps.
    That's before you consider where the staff will come from. Consider the logs trail, and the extra staff this capability growth would require.
    How do Finland manage?
    I suppose they don't have to hit the ground from a standing start, their investment is just building on last generation investment rather than as you say trying to move from the 50's to the 2020's (also they have a budget over over 3 billion rather than our 1 billion). It's a huge issue that isn't going to get any cheaper if there's intention to change it. But yeah it's interesting that we are actually having such debates/discussions and they are being reported.
    Another issue that I just thought of, how long before you'd have complaints from the rest of Dublin if you had significant increase in jet noise from Baldonnel?

  19. Likes DeV liked this post
  20. #362
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,697
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Ever since we replaced the sea fires with vampires we have been downgrading our air defence capability. We went from the equivalent of the F16 of its day to a 1st gen jet trainer, which we replaced with.... a 1st gen jet trainer that didnt have ejector seats. More recently replacing that with a turbo prop trainer with ejector seats. It's like we have maintained vigorously our 1950s level of capability.
    It is great to see the discussion is being had by experts in the field. The required investment is scary though.
    It would take at least a billion, today to get us in the game, including primary radar operated by Air Corps.
    That's before you consider where the staff will come from. Consider the logs trail, and the extra staff this capability growth would require.
    How do Finland manage?
    How does Finland manage? With over 3 times our defence budget

  21. #363
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,785
    Post Thanks / Like
    The finns also, in the 90s managed to jump from ancient saab draken and mig 21 to F18. The rest of their military air arm otherwise bore striking similarities to ours. They also used fougas, learjets and currently use pc12 and casa 295.
    This from a country with a population of just over 5.5m, living alongside a neighbour who occupied them many times in their history. Also PFP and EU members.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  22. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  23. #364
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,714
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    The finns also, in the 90s managed to jump from ancient saab draken and mig 21 to F18. The rest of their military air arm otherwise bore striking similarities to ours. They also used fougas, learjets and currently use pc12 and casa 295.
    This from a country with a population of just over 5.5m, living alongside a neighbour who occupied them many times in their history. Also PFP and EU members.
    They also historically I think had a stronger economy than we did pre-90's which would have had an impact, along with of course the fact that they run Conscription.

  24. #365
    C/S
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like
    I see no one is covering the embarrassment of a former Ambassador standing up and rigorously trying to claim that "Ireland never has, nor never would, resort to calling in the British for assistance for air support".

    She was laughed out of the room

  25. Likes Shaqra, Flamingo, northie liked this post
  26. #366
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,714
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    I see no one is covering the embarrassment of a former Ambassador standing up and rigorously trying to claim that "Ireland never has, nor never would, resort to calling in the British for assistance for air support".

    She was laughed out of the room
    Which fecking Ambassador did that, Christ what a disgrace.

  27. #367
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Back in Dublin , thank god
    Posts
    257
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fantasia View Post
    I see no one is covering the embarrassment of a former Ambassador standing up and rigorously trying to claim that "Ireland never has, nor never would, resort to calling in the British for assistance for air support".

    She was laughed out of the room
    Yes - that was the talk of the place today. Either DFA are completely ignorant of the situation or they choose to lie. One of the ex Air Corps participants was apparently abused by the DFA for saying that we had no primary radar cover of our airspace.
    “The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards.”
    ― Thucydides

  28. #368
    Captain
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,714
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaqra View Post
    Yes - that was the talk of the place today. Either DFA are completely ignorant of the situation or they choose to lie. One of the ex Air Corps participants was apparently abused by the DFA for saying that we had no primary radar cover of our airspace.
    Wait is this former Ambassador still part of the DFA or not? I wouldn't be surprised if few if any within DFA would be aware whether we have Primary Radar systems.

  29. #369
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,785
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaqra View Post
    Yes - that was the talk of the place today. Either DFA are completely ignorant of the situation or they choose to lie. One of the ex Air Corps participants was apparently abused by the DFA for saying that we had no primary radar cover of our airspace.
    Were they willing to point out where our primary radar are? Because otherwise, the man spoke the truth that was nor a secret.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  30. #370
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,094
    Post Thanks / Like
    It was heresy beyond bearing, since it was true.

  31. Likes na grohmiti, Flamingo liked this post
  32. #371
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,697
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Were they willing to point out where our primary radar are? Because otherwise, the man spoke the truth that was nor a secret.
    Where are they?
    Dublin Airport
    Shannon Airport
    Cork Airport

    All have primary radars

    Then there mobile DF radars (when deployed)

  33. #372
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,785
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Where are they?
    Dublin Airport
    Shannon Airport
    Cork Airport

    All have primary radars

    Then there mobile DF radars (when deployed)
    Speek engrish man.
    The Air Corps have no primary radar. They have no access to Irish ATC information. They barely have access to the Airspace within the don itself. Anything taking off needs permission from Dublin first. Anyone flying with transponder off is invisible.
    The Mobile Radar used by the DF are again for local control only, and only useful in the air defence role, not for vectoring aircraft onto other flying targets.
    The Primary radar at the location you mention are purely for local ATC only. Not much use at the boundary between Ourselves and Shanwick.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  34. #373
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    22,697
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Speek engrish man.
    The Air Corps have no primary radar. They have no access to Irish ATC information. They barely have access to the Airspace within the don itself. Anything taking off needs permission from Dublin first. Anyone flying with transponder off is invisible.
    The Mobile Radar used by the DF are again for local control only, and only useful in the air defence role, not for vectoring aircraft onto other flying targets.
    The Primary radar at the location you mention are purely for local ATC only. Not much use at the boundary between Ourselves and Shanwick.
    Anyone flying within primary radar coverage of those 3 airports is visible (even with no transponder off).

    Is it good enough no but that is fact

  35. #374
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,785
    Post Thanks / Like
    It is a pity then that our airspace extends much further north, south eas and west from those airports.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  36. Likes DeV liked this post
  37. #375
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    496
    Post Thanks / Like
    Offical attitudes to defence in Ireland have been ever the same - spend as little as we can get away with and rely on Britain as our shield.
    It mightn't be a particularly noble attitude, but I suppose you'd have to say that it has worked out thus far.

    Even fen See Chermans were rampaging across Europe, landing agents within the state and accidentally bombing Dublin, we did no more to prepare for the defence of our airspace than buy a handful of Gladiator biplanes and a couple of Hurricanes.

    Maybe it comes from the realisation that if we ever attacked by a serious adversary, any resistance that even the best airforce we could possibly afford would be no more than token.

  38. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes madmark liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •