Berserk Fury
New Member
I was just thinking of a possible alternative to Hellfires.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #203
The Exocet I referred to is the MM-40 Block 3 version.
A summary of it can be found here:
http://www.defense-update.com/products/e/exocet-3.htm
What's wrong with Hellfire Missiles, Beserk?
A summary of it can be found here:
http://www.defense-update.com/products/e/exocet-3.htm
What's wrong with Hellfire Missiles, Beserk?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #204
The helicopter is needed to provide over the horizon targetting data for the ships. A ship cannot see very far beyond the horizon (on the surface) due to the curvature of the Earth. In order for a ship to target a Harpoon to it's maximum range, it needs another platform to be on the otherside of the horizon to tell the ship what's there.stephen weist said:
A helicopter is probably the most flexible way to do this, plus they typically provide extensive anti-submarine warfare capabilites, general utility lift capabilities, plus other capabilities. SM-2's cannot provide this capability. Our FFG's incidentally are slated to get SM-2 Block IIIA missiles, in a few years time...
Harpoon's actually DO have mid-course guidance capabilities, and will require same to hit a moving target. They will be capable of hitting a target designated by GPS co-ordinates, but GPS has proven less than successful at hitting moving targets...
Does anybody know if any design details on the Australian 'Aleigh Burke' (the new AWD) are available in the public domain yet?
It will have to be a modification of the design due to the crewing reductions but the overall impact the Australian requirements will have in respect of the 'modified' design have not been released in any detail as far as I know.
It will have to be a modification of the design due to the crewing reductions but the overall impact the Australian requirements will have in respect of the 'modified' design have not been released in any detail as far as I know.
I've got a hard copy of the 2002 G&C specs, but its still covered by comm-in-conf provisions,alexsa said:
They are certainly playing this one very close to the chest in respect of the proposed package from each contender (noting the F100 is still an off the shelf option but does not meet all the proposed requirements,..... as far as I know).
It is probably a good thing but it wouel be nice to see a bit more detail. I guess we will just have to wait.
It is probably a good thing but it wouel be nice to see a bit more detail. I guess we will just have to wait.
Who from? New build or current config? Just wanted to add them to my site once they begin construction...scraw said:
www.worldwideaircraftcarriers.com
They will be based on either the French Mistral design, or the new Spanish design built by Navantia which isn't actually built yet but there are some specs here :Jeff Head said:
http://defencetalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=45859&postcount=23
and a computer generated pic and some more info here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier#Spanish_Armada_Espa.C3.B1ola
afaik the Spanish design is the favourite, and i hope its the one we choose
I have the Spanish Strategic Projection Carrier up on my site. I list it there as a CVL because the Spanish indicate that one of the principle roles will be the aviation role.pepsi said:
I also know it also has a principle amphibious capability which I believe is what you are saying the RAN will use them for. Will the RAN embark air support aircraft (Harriers or JSF) on the vessels as well?
I also habe the Mistral on the Amphib page there...it seems clearly much more devoted to Amphib ops.
I hope the RAN chooses the Spanish design as well.
www.worldwideaircraftcarriers.com
Last edited:
seantheaussie
New Member
They will be modified Spanish Navantia OR French Armaris Mistral as they ADF is to stupid to buy off the shelfJeff Head said:
all unofficial, but apparently the option of JSFb's has been considered and they would be RAAF pilots on RAN assets.pepsi said:
In the long run (and if it happens) you would have to expect that some fleet air arm pilots would train on the type.gf0012-aust said:
We can only hope ..... but it seems sensible to use the conbined force concept the RAF and RN are using with Harriers but still have seperate squadrons allowing the 'sea' based pilots to train in their specialised role. You never know if both arms are using the F35 it may prompt further buys of the type (probable a future block) in the future.
Great! I would love to see the RAN back into the aircraft carrier buisiness and the JSF would be just the ticket.pepsi said:
I'd also love to see the USN develop an AEW and an EW version of the Osprey and market that in conjunction with the JSF. It would greatly enhance the Sea-control capabilities of any allied VSTOL carrier.
The AEW Sea King in its first interations was pretty basic but effective at the time. It has since been improved in orer to retain effectiveness and is to be replaced by a much more capable AEW Merlin as far as I know. The problem is we are not going to operate this type (or the Ospray) on the basis of recent decisions.
It would not seem impossible to graft the AEW fit of the Merlin inot an NH90 airframe. (particualry when you think the original AEW Sea King was developed in very short order).
It would not seem impossible to graft the AEW fit of the Merlin inot an NH90 airframe. (particualry when you think the original AEW Sea King was developed in very short order).