Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Thank you my dear Arjen,maybe it was just drawing number only.
2
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Kalinin prototypes and projects
« Last post by hesham on Today at 03:35:40 pm »
Amazing drawings my dear Ucon.
3
Army Projects / Re: E-100 turret
« Last post by Michel Van on Today at 02:33:49 pm »

The secondary armament looks the same as the 75mm on the Maus to me?

original planed was a for E-100 a co-axial 75 mm KwK 44 L/36.5, but those plans show the barrel is far to short for that gun.

back to Turret, it look like that Krupp design of December 1942.
 
5
Modelling Forum / Re: B-29 model
« Last post by m1lkman on Today at 02:18:31 pm »
Not that long ago there was a B-29 salvage attempt, an aircraft on the ice in Greenland I think.  Ended up completely burned out which was a crying shame.  What a missed opportunity.
I saw that video - I had the tears welling up in my eyes at the end. Still one of the most frustrating pieces of film I ever saw. Heartbreaking - after all that work they put in. Considering how close the came actually flying the plane. As I said, gut wrenching...
7
Military / Re: Surface Ships Need More Offensive Punch, Outlook
« Last post by bring_it_on on Today at 02:17:16 pm »


So the expected price is ~$900M BEFORE government furnished equipment, correct?  As in all the expensive radar and weapons systems.

Is there any idea what the government furnished equipment will cost for this ship?

Quote
The target basic construction cost is USD495 million, the USN said, which does not include cost of non-recurring construction plans and other associated costs for a lead ship, government-furnished combat or weapon systems, or change orders.

The programme office, the USN said, “Envisions a [fiscal year] 2020 competition that will consider existing parent designs for a small surface combatant that can be modified to accommodate FFG(X) requirements”. Jane's Defence Weekly Nov.2017

8
https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/02/15/next-gen-combat-vehicle-prototyping-to-be-accelerated/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow
Thank you Posting boobymike.

Wonder if "closed hatch IFV" means squad (tms ie "squad splitting) hardly ever leaves the vehicle.  no robots shooting back at their masters please. guess that's another reason to stay closed hatch.

9
Military / Re: Surface Ships Need More Offensive Punch, Outlook
« Last post by marauder2048 on Today at 01:41:02 pm »
As in all the expensive radar and weapons systems.

Is there any idea what the government furnished equipment will cost for this ship?

Which is the most important question actually. EASR alone is around $100M.
10
Space Projects / Re: DIRECT v3
« Last post by merriman on Today at 12:49:03 pm »
So, when NASA no longer has SSME's to toss into the Atlantic. What then? buy (with my money) and toss BE-4's into the drink?

NASA's done the heavy lifting of raw research and passing the findings on to those who can use it. That agencies job should be research and development, not space flight. The game has changed. Matured.  Little courage is displayed by those wishing to hang onto the government tit till retirement. Those answerable to Congressional over-seers (Halls filled with lawyers and other know-things) are risk averse. That's why we're still in the ammunition mode of spaceflight when it comes to government efforts.

Time to hitch rides with outfits that appreciate and are burdened with the profit-motive way of doing business. Reasonable risks are taken by those who see profit as the result of hard work. And that ain't the NASA.

David
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10