Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Aerospace / Re: MH-139 to replace USAF UH-1Ns
« Last post by Moose on Yesterday at 10:36:31 pm »
That $1.7b discount just seems to be too much for the USAF to ignore. It's a very nice helicopter, the assembly is in the US, and it's not going to be deployed outside CONUS so supply chain issues are less worrisome. Probably also great news for the pilots, who will now be experienced on a platform that has a whole bunch of commercial users when they leave the service.
2
Itís ok I believe you... Added.
3
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: C-130 V/STOL modification projects
« Last post by elmayerle on Yesterday at 09:55:48 pm »
Could be.  It was a long time ago and my memory is a bit faded.  That does sound right, though.  Is that reference readily available?  It sounds like one I definitely would like.
4
Military / Re: US Navy diesel powered submarines?
« Last post by Kadija_Man on Yesterday at 08:30:40 pm »
Diesel Submarines: The Game Changer the U.S. Navy Needs

Is it that time again?  This idea comes up every decade or so.  It runs into the basic problem that the USN rarely has the luxury of reliably  operating close to its forward bases.  Sure, sometimes your new, "cheap" SSKs will be operating in the Sea of Japan.  But sometime you'll need to surge to the Persian Gulf again, and those SSKs will be too far away to be operationally useful.

Methinks you have misread the article, if you believe that is what it is about.   What he is proposing is a theatre only use of diesel electric submarines, rather than a world-wide use of them.  The SSNs would handle the world-wide deployment of the US Navy while the SS would handle the needs of being deployed close to the PRC, along with the Japanese.

Is it a good idea?  I have no idea.  I put the article up for comment to see what others thought about it's reasoning.    What I find interesting is that he limits his views only to employing Japanese boats and ignores the ROK and ROC presence in the South China Sea.   I wonder why?
5
Aerospace / Re: MH-139 to replace USAF UH-1Ns
« Last post by AeroFranz on Yesterday at 07:23:23 pm »
Wouldn't have called that!  :o
6
Aerospace / Re: JMR (Joint Multi-Role) & FVL (Future Vertical Lift) Programs
« Last post by AeroFranz on Yesterday at 07:21:41 pm »
The requirements shown at industry day fit the S-97 to a tee.

7
Aerospace / Re: MH-139 to replace USAF UH-1Ns
« Last post by yasotay on Yesterday at 07:14:08 pm »
Would have bet on H-60 myself, since USAF is buying new HH-60, but its all about the $$.  Guess they made the M-139 less expensive to operate.  It is a good flying helicopter though.
8
Military / Re: US Navy diesel powered submarines?
« Last post by Moose on Yesterday at 06:23:42 pm »
We're building better robots. They're cheaper and they donít get their crews killed recharging their batteries.
9
Military / Re: US Navy diesel powered submarines?
« Last post by TomS on Yesterday at 06:22:00 pm »
Diesel Submarines: The Game Changer the U.S. Navy Needs

Is it that time again?  This idea comes up every decade or so.  It runs into the basic problem that the USN rarely has the luxury of reliably  operating close to its forward bases.  Sure, sometimes your new, "cheap" SSKs will be operating in the Sea of Japan.  But sometime you'll need to surge to the Persian Gulf again, and those SSKs will be too far away to be operationally useful.
10
Hello Chris,

I have just received a copy from The Aviation Bookshop.
I don't have a photo, so can you send me a quiz question
instead.
regards,
Richard
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10