An interesting article addressing those concerns of the information downloading and the time taken ,this would potentially enable the aircraft to be ready quicker
An interesting read about claims of radar to detect low observable aircraft perhaps there should be a money back guarantee
topman wrote:That sounds like a complete money spinner for years to come.
That'll be fun adding all that in for dets, I wonder how many big dets bar RF are ready for F35?
Anyone who still thinks we're operating ours out of 'austere' conditions because it can take off on a short runway only needs to read that article to see what a none starter the idea is.
SW1 wrote:Electrical demands of this a/c
topman wrote:Do tell
Actually that reminds me of meeting with the PT, some interesting choice with regards 'all electric' even in areas we've traditional relied on mechanical means because of reliability.
We'll be walking before we run for sure, I don't about any deployments etc but I'd bet my pension they'll be plenty of senior officers who'll be 'can we' or 'are you sure we really need...'
Always fun times...
seaspear wrote:There was a recent article about wargaming from the U.S apologies for not providing it but showed in the event of hostilities in Europe although the f35 may win in the air being destroyed on the airield ,this may be an argument for the R.A.A.F to stick with the F35B which can be deployed/dispersed as the Harrier was using civilian roads
seaspear wrote:although the f35 may win in the air being destroyed on the airield ,this may be an argument for the R.A.A.F to stick with the F35B which can be deployed/dispersed as the Harrier was using civilian roads
NickC wrote:The specific content of the Block 4 upgrade remains closely held, but breaks down broadly into six categories:
• Integration of seven new weapons, including the Small Diameter Bomb II, British weapons such as the ASRAAM [CSM version?] and Meteor air-to-air missiles; Turkey’s Standoff Missile and Norway’s Joint Strike Missile; [does not explicitly mention SPEAR 3]
NickC wrote:Search patterns on the open ocean will be improved
As for our Harpoon compatibility, this is quite different from what we have for surface launch and has not been ordered (? yet?) for our P-8sNickC wrote:the Navy [has not] asked to integrate the SLAM-ER (Standoff Land Attack Missile-Extended Range) version of the Harpoon anti-ship missile.
This is official speak. The less official reports say that there is a further company "to prgrm manage" the effort and that LM is no longer the "lead".NickC wrote: [Lockheed to team with MIT, MITRE and SPAWAR to re-architect ALIS]
Timmymagic wrote:Spear will definitely be on the list for the UK.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests