Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Defending the Irish airspace

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

  • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
    I would say a bigger worry for NATO is the Russians Parking Submarines in the GIUK gap, hence the UK investment in the P-8 and the Carrier strike group.
    If you want a great place to hide an Russian attack submarine look no further than the waters between Donegal and Islay. This is the main route out of Faslane and the old Holy Loch bases for SSBN's. Why great, well the Brits littered the place with loads of German U-boats after the war, so plenty of big metallic objects on the bottom to mask any sub hiding there.

    Comment


    • Interesting that the Russians were also using Mig31 to escort the Bears during one excursion.
      An old aircraft with an unmatched max altitude amongst similar aircraft. Often used to train cosmonauts at the edge of the earth's atmosphere.
      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by CTU View Post
        Here's todays track of the Russian day trippers.

        Big, big thanks for finding me one of me new fav twitter accounts, Mil Radar, so kool

        Comment


        • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
          The Tu-95 & Tu-142 Bears may be old but they have been modernized in the past few years. Also unlike fighters their flight hours/cycle life is not so short especially as the Russian never tried to use them in a low level role. We can easily expect each one to have a life of 30,000 hours (a 737 or A320 would be 3-4 times) and that the Russian never use them for more than 200 hours per year. I let you do the Maths on that one.
          As for the Tu-160 Blackjacks these are a lot newer and just when they entered service the USSR collapsed so for many years they got little use and so should have plenty of hours still on the airframe. In fact they have recently re-started production of the Blackjack with the Tu-160M2. However spares and especially those for the engines remain critical and thus the amount of sorties per year will be severely limited.
          What some might have missed is that the Russians have also been bussing the Yanks and Canukes also last week with aircraft flying from a base in easten Siberia (Ukrainka).
          I'd be fairly confident in saying no Russian Military aircraft will make 30,000hrs life, most need a major overhaul at around the 1000hr mark. The engines are the major maintenance nightmare with most Russian Military jet engines having a life of only a couple of hundred hours.

          And I agree they have severe spares shortages and very limited capacity to manufacture new engines and parts.

          Each sortie must chew up a significant amount of the years availability.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
            If you want a great place to hide an Russian attack submarine look no further than the waters between Donegal and Islay. This is the main route out of Faslane and the old Holy Loch bases for SSBN's. Why great, well the Brits littered the place with loads of German U-boats after the war, so plenty of big metallic objects on the bottom to mask any sub hiding there.
            Interestingly the P-8 doesn't have a MAD boom, they have some other method to detect sub surface combatants.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
              Interestingly the P-8 doesn't have a MAD boom, they have some other method to detect sub surface combatants.
              The USN claims they do not need a MAD as their acoustic sensors are now so good!
              However the Indians do not agree and they have added a CAE AN/ASQ-508A MAD as well as an aft radar, the Telephonics APS-143C(V)3 which some may know off the CN235/C295 MPA. Saab also offered the same MAD on the Swordfish and what was noticeable was that it was smaller and closer to the airframe than those we have seen on P3 aircraft or the like.

              Comment


              • I'd be hesitant in assuming that the sensors/processing on the Indian P-8's have the same capability on the US and selected other operators P-8's...

                Comment


                • Well, India's primary (potential) enemy is Pakistan and they have form for sinking one Pak sub and shooting down at least two ASW aircraft so they take it very seriously, so I'd imagine their sensor kit is top drawer.

                  Comment


                  • Charlie 252 is spot on. Even the best Russian fighter engine is usually good for a max of 500 hrs between overhauls, far below Western standards. The Russian mentality about certification is different than Western practise and the West traditionally gives a lot more independence to its mechs and engineers to decide what is serviceable or not. They (russians) will defer an opinion up the chain of command and squadron engineering officers would be making decisions that would be taken by much lower ranks in the Western militaries. In saying that, in wartime, the rulebook goes out the window and they will bypass normal servicing and overhaul routines if they feel they have to.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                      I'd be hesitant in assuming that the sensors/processing on the Indian P-8's have the same capability on the US and selected other operators P-8's...
                      The sensors maybe the same but I would wonder if they had been given the same acoustic database as has been supplied to the RAF. I would also think that India has its own sound catalogue which it uses for sub detection.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                        Well, India's primary (potential) enemy is Pakistan and they have form for sinking one Pak sub and shooting down at least two ASW aircraft so they take it very seriously, so I'd imagine their sensor kit is top drawer.
                        Don't confuse what India will want with what the US will offer.

                        Turkey, a NATO country, was refused access to the top drawer PATRIOT system - what attitude do you think the US takes to its holiest of holy ASW systems in a country who's defence establishment has close ties to the Russians?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                          Charlie 252 is spot on. Even the best Russian fighter engine is usually good for a max of 500 hrs between overhauls, far below Western standards. The Russian mentality about certification is different than Western practise and the West traditionally gives a lot more independence to its mechs and engineers to decide what is serviceable or not. They (russians) will defer an opinion up the chain of command and squadron engineering officers would be making decisions that would be taken by much lower ranks in the Western militaries. In saying that, in wartime, the rulebook goes out the window and they will bypass normal servicing and overhaul routines if they feel they have to.
                          There is a major difference between service intervals and service life. The airframe of most Russian aircraft are built like brick sh**houses. And I know enough Russian aircraft designers to know that they design the airframe to be tough. The area that they fall down on are the systems, hence why they are pushing through a moderistaion of their long range assets. But following the collapse of the USSR a problem the Russian face is that the integrated supply chain is no longer there. Many component where made in other countries some of which are not on the Russian friends list like Ukraine and Georgia. Also many of the more specialist company no longer exist. A case in hand are the engines for the Tu160, there is a manufacturer but they cannot supply the numbers needed for the current fleet. Neither in spares or in terms of new engines.

                          What we can be certain is that these flights and the others in the Pacific are important for Putin and will continue. They may not have the same frequency of the past week but we will see them from time to time.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
                            Interestingly the P-8 doesn't have a MAD boom, they have some other method to detect sub surface combatants.
                            Will our new expensive toys the C-295's be able to track Russian Akula class subs wandering their way through the Irish Sea?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                              Will our new expensive toys the C-295's be able to track Russian Akula class subs wandering their way through the Irish Sea?
                              Only if they travel on the surface. So, err....

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                                Don't confuse what India will want with what the US will offer.

                                Turkey, a NATO country, was refused access to the top drawer PATRIOT system - what attitude do you think the US takes to its holiest of holy ASW systems in a country who's defence establishment has close ties to the Russians?
                                At this stage, I dont think America would trust Turkey with the keys to a Ford Ranger. I'd imagine the US and India would negotiate for exactly what level of ASW detection quality their money should buy them,knowing that the fallback position for India is to buy Russian.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X