Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Missile Projects / Re: Japanese missiles
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 05:19:57 pm »
https://thediplomat.com/2018/01/japan-ready-to-mass-produce-new-supersonic-anti-ship-missile/

"Japan’s Ministry of Defense (MoD) completed development of its first domestically designed supersonic anti-ship missile, designated XASM-3, with mass production of the new weapon system slated to begin in fiscal year 2019, according to local media reports.

The XASM-3 has been specifically designed to be carried by the Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s (JASDF) F-2 multirole fighter jets, a Mitsubishi license-produced variant of Lockheed Martin’s F-16. The service currently operates around 90 Mitsubishi F-2 multirole fighter aircraft, which first entered service in 2007.

“Each aircraft will be capable of carrying up to two XASM-3 missiles,” I noted July 2017. “The new missile will replace the older domestically produced Type 80 and Type 93 air-to-ship missiles capable of reaching near supersonic speed.” Powered by a ramjet engine, the missile can reportedly reach top speeds of up to Mach 3 and has an operational range of 80 nautical miles (150 kilometers."
2
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Ruffy Airplanes
« Last post by burunduk on Today at 04:31:54 pm »
Apophenia, thank you for the Ruffy-Baumann story.
But there are two very different airplanes on the double photo (look on the shape of fuselage, shape and place of stabilizer and so on).
What is the bottom airplane?
3
Military / Re: Surface Ships Need More Offensive Punch, Outlook
« Last post by bring_it_on on Today at 04:08:25 pm »
4
Naval Projects / Re: Unbuilt Dutch WW2 multi-hull submarine designs
« Last post by Avimimus on Today at 03:55:22 pm »
Those are some impressive performance figures (and an impressive profile - as usual!)
6
Designation Systems / Re: Hawker designation list
« Last post by ursrius on Today at 02:32:59 pm »
Hesham,
Thanks for the summary: I have just a few comments

Quote
- P.1000 from 1940,raised up to P.1163,after that the prefix changed into HS,from HS.1170 up
  to HS.1207
Agreed, though according to BSP2, Project numbers P.1161, 1162 and 1164 to 1169 were not used. When everything finally came under the Hawker Siddeley banner, the Kingston project numbering began with HS. BAe reverted to the P prefix from P.1208 on.

Quote
- P.122 after absorbing Blackburn in 1960,continued to P.161
Although it can be difficult to decide exactly when a Brough project can be considered Blackburn or Hawker Siddeley, I believe they should be considered as Blackburn designs up to P.138. Hawker Siddeley continued the same P series. Again it is difficult to decide when a project is HS or BAe, but I think P.161 would be correct. The P sequence was then continued by BAe up to P.183, after which all Brough projects were integrated into the Kingston project numbering system.

Quote
- SP.63 also after purchased Blackburn in 1960,went on up to SP.90 (maybe)
Interesting - I have no information on the Brough SP series other than the SP.80 Helicrane, otherwise the B.118A. I would really like to see anything on this series (along with source info)

Quote
- HS.131 up to HS.149,after taken over De Havilland in 1960,called Hatfield division
Agreed

Quote
- HS.800 blew up to HS.837,after acquired Avro to became Manchester subsidiary
According to Project Tech Profile 04 - The Air Staff and AEW, Chris Gibson, the HS.836 was a 1978 design, so BAe projects begin with BAe.836 and Hawker Siddeley ends at HS.835, with the exception of HS.860, a variation on HS.806.

Quote
HSA,APD & APG,all were the same,started from HSA.1000 and last known HSA.1023
Personally I have only ever seen these as APD. It would be great if anyone has a list of these.

Great work Hesham, thanks for a good summary.
7
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Mirage IIIK
« Last post by uk 75 on Today at 02:17:36 pm »
I agree that the Mirage IIIK would have
been proposed in the strike role. It would make sense as the Mirage IVK was offered for the high end of the
TFX requirement for the RAF but a P1154/low end Canberra replacement needed the Mirage IIIK.
Dassault wanted the UK to drop F111 in favour of Mirage,
but perhaps also reduce the F4 order to fighters only.
Perhaps Dassault was ahead of his political masters so no brochure was produced. Rolls Royce was also keen
on any projects to use its engine- F111 did not, the Mirage schemes did.
Fits the 1964 swirls for me.
8
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Breguet 941 STOL and related projects
« Last post by Dynoman on Today at 12:16:13 pm »
JC, will you be including the US airline demonstration flights of the MD-188 version?
9
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Mirage IIIK
« Last post by PaulMM (Overscan) on Today at 12:07:15 pm »
Also - Mirage IVK was proposed in 1965, the same year as the IIIK drawing.
10
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Mirage IIIK
« Last post by PaulMM (Overscan) on Today at 11:59:15 am »
The Spey-engined Mirage IV (as alternative to the F-111 to replace the cancelled TSR.2) for the UK was designated IVK.

It is most logical to propose (in lieu of further information) that the IIIK was also proposed to the UK (and Spey-powered to boot). Makes more sense than New Zealand.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10