International Aerospace Discussion

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.

Brando
BRFite
Posts: 675
Joined: 26 Feb 2008 06:18

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Brando » 30 Sep 2012 14:08

D Roy wrote:Those propfans are certainly something though.


Considering that the An-32s of the IAF are undergoing upgrades would it be possible to install the Progress D-27 propfans on them ? The Current engines of the An-32, the AI-20 weights around 1150 kg while the D-27s weight around 1650kgs each but each D-27 is "dual-shaft" so that's like 2 engines in one. Also, the current AI-20s produce about 3100 KW while the D-27s produce 10,000 KW with a power to weight ration of nearly 6.3KW/kg!!

If it's possible the An-32 would be a totally different aircraft.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 30 Sep 2012 14:34

Would likely tear the wings off and fly away leaving fuselage behind

Unless an32 were put to use flying gold ingots stacked to roof from congressi treasury there is such no small but heavy object ia wants to transport

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby vivek_ahuja » 30 Sep 2012 23:01

Singha wrote:Would likely tear the wings off and fly away leaving fuselage behind


:rotfl:

RajD
BRFite
Posts: 138
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby RajD » 01 Oct 2012 11:29

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2012 ... |FRONTPAGE
Posting from the link: One of the interesting clauses from revised offer to Switzerland from Dassault.
• 12 aircraft for $2.34 billion, offering full capabilities and simulators with an operational efficiency that Dassault claims is comparable to 22 Gripen aircraft.
Gurus, Is this purported potency (12 rafyys= 22 gripees} in capabilities for real or just a marketing ploy?
Regards.
Rajendra

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 01 Oct 2012 15:39

^^^

• 22 Rafales for $3.3 billion

Dassault also offers the above deal. They are giving equal no of Rafales for the same price.

The offer of 12 aircraft for $2.34 billion might have included lifecycle costs to claim that 12 rafyy= 22 gripees. Less aircraft = less cost but quantity has a quality of their own.

RajD
BRFite
Posts: 138
Joined: 29 Mar 2011 16:01

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby RajD » 01 Oct 2012 18:11

nakul wrote:^^^

• 22 Rafales for $3.3 billion

Dassault also offers the above deal. They are giving equal no of Rafales for the same price.

The offer of 12 aircraft for $2.34 billion might have included lifecycle costs to claim that 12 rafyy= 22 gripees. Less aircraft = less cost but quantity has a quality of their own.

Of course I understand the life cycle cost line of thinking but as regards potency and capability, 1:2(approx.) ratio seems to be a bit of exaggeration.
Regards.
Rajendra

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 01 Oct 2012 18:35

RajD wrote:
nakul wrote:^^^

• 22 Rafales for $3.3 billion

Dassault also offers the above deal. They are giving equal no of Rafales for the same price.

The offer of 12 aircraft for $2.34 billion might have included lifecycle costs to claim that 12 rafyy= 22 gripees. Less aircraft = less cost but quantity has a quality of their own.

Of course I understand the life cycle cost line of thinking but as regards potency and capability, 1:2(approx.) ratio seems to be a bit of exaggeration.
Regards.
Rajendra


Thats marketing stuff. The stuff that Lockheed Martin puts out about the F 22 is even more so. In fact, this is much less exaggerated than other vendors' claims. At the end of the day, the Swiss would be better off doing the calculations on their own.

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 02 Oct 2012 13:12

US Defense Biz Outlook Grim, Foreign Sales Won't Save It: Deloitte

By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.
Published: October 1, 2012

Even if [US] Congress somehow averts sequestration, the defense industry is headed for layoffs and, at best, anemic growth, and the much-vaunted surge in foreign military sales won't turn that around.

If the automatic cuts known as sequestration do take effect as currently scheduled in January, the impact would be "a devastating blow."

That's the bleak verdict from Tom Captain, head of the aerospace and defense practice at Deloitte LLP, who previewed the consulting firm's mid-year overview of the industry in a conversation this morning with AOL Defense. (We'll update this story with a link to the report when it's released tomorrow).

<snip>

Last year's Budget Control Act cut $487 billion from defense spending over the next 10 years, roughly $50 billion of which is already reflected in the president's budget request for 2013. Since about half of Pentagon spending goes to contractors, that's about a $25 billion hit to industry -- whose annual revenues are only about $210 billion. That's a 12 percent hit to revenues. If the defense industry's 724,000-strong workforce takes a proportional blow, that's 86,000 layoffs.

If sequestration hits, the cuts double, so multiply all the damage done by two...... <snip>

So between the cuts required last year and sequestration looming now, the Budget Control Act is a one-two punch, Captain said. "When you add all that up," he said, "the defense industry will have shrunk by about 25 percent. One in four defense workers, gone."

<snip>

But there are plenty of companies -- US, Western European, Russian, and more -- all going after that same small pool of customers. In one of the biggest recent competitions, for the Indian air force's new Medium Multi-Role Aircraft (MMRA)........ Comparable US contracts, by contrast, tend to have only two or three bidders -- most of them, obviously, American -- so the odds are a lot worse abroad.

"It's a buyer's market," Captain said. "The reality is that foreign military sales [are] promising, but it's very competitive."

http://defense.aol.com/2012/10/01/us-de ... it-deloit/

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 02 Oct 2012 13:33

That defence cut of $487 billion over next ten years is miniscule considering that US would spend more than $6.5 trillion over the next ten years. I wonder how much extra flab they have grown over the years that needs to be taken care of. The recent EADS BAE merger could be a pointer in that direction.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 02 Oct 2012 20:28

APA has update on Nebo-M system

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Nebo-M-Annex.html

Ravi Karumanchiri
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 19 Oct 2009 06:40
Location: www.ravikarumanchiri.com
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Ravi Karumanchiri » 03 Oct 2012 21:29

RE: The proposed/potential merger between EADS and BAE......


Finmeccanica Eyes Strategic Response To Possible Merger
Oct. 1, 2012 - 09:10AM |
By TOM KINGTON and ANDREW CHUTER

ROME and LONDON — Finmeccanica may be mulling partnerships in the wake of the planned BAE-EADS merger.... <snip>

“Marriages are made with dowries,” Giuseppe Orsi told a conference in Rome on Sept. 25. “While a political deal on defense can be made without industry, industry will never be able to sign an accord without a political deal first.”

Orsi’s remarks may have been designed to solicit a reaction from the Italian government to the planned BAE-EADS merger — a deal that would fundamentally change Europe’s defense industry and potentially sideline companies such as Finmeccanica.

<snip>

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2012 ... ionstories


&


Germany Not Seeking Stake in Merged EADS/BAE: Report
Oct. 2, 2012 - 08:36AM |
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

PARIS — Germany will not seek a stake in the company born from a planned merger of European aerospace giant EADS and British defense group BAE Systems, French newspaper Le Figaro reported Oct. 2.

The German media have been speculating that Berlin planned to take an equal stake in the merged company as France, a move that could have jeopardized tie-up plans.

But Le Figaro, which quoted “a good source,” reported that “the German state is not asking for a stake” as part of demands that it has put forward to EADS in merger negotiations.

<snip>

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2012 ... ionstories

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 04 Oct 2012 21:38

Russian Defense Ministry Signs Multi-billion-dollar Plane Contract

Russia's Defense Ministry on Thursday signed a contract worth about 140 billion rubles ($4 billion) to buy 39 IL-476 transport planes, President Vladimir Putin announced.

"This is the first, essentially new plane, that Russia's aviation industry has produced in the past 21 years" President Putin said "I am confident that this plane will enjoy great demand here, and among our possible partners abroad."

The Russian President made the announcement while watching the modified IL-76 undergo flight tests at the Aviastar-SP aviation complex in Ulyanovsk. The plane completed a flight test that lasted approximately 15 minutes.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 05 Oct 2012 05:15

Austin wrote:Russian Defense Ministry Signs Multi-billion-dollar Plane Contract
Russia's Defense Ministry on Thursday signed a contract worth about 140 billion rubles ($4 billion) to buy 39 IL-476 transport planes, President Vladimir Putin announced.
Would this help IAF's IL-76/78? even if the spares situation improves it would be great... now all Rodina lovers will push for more IL birds for Desh.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 05 Oct 2012 08:54


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 06 Oct 2012 14:04

Russia signs deal for new-generation Il-76 transports

Worth 140 billion roubles ($4.5 billion), the award is the largest of its kind placed by Moscow in the past 20 years

Compared with the legacy Il-76TD/MD, the -90A variant offers a 10% lower fuel burn, and has an increased maximum take-off weight of 210t. The new aircraft will have a range of 2,700nm (5,000km) with a 52t payload, and can also be operated from paved and unpaved runways with an elevation of up to 9,840ft (3,000m).



Looks like each II-476 will cost ~ $115 million

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 06 Oct 2012 14:50

yes it will sustain and make Ilyushin a viable co again, which should improve our OEM spares problem. the Il476 would likely have a good % of parts in common with our birds.

we need more of Il476 sized planes without a doubt. we could use another 30 of these planes. and our older eighteen IL76 could be MLUed and fitted with PS90 engines.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 06 Oct 2012 21:56

Austin wrote:Russia signs deal for new-generation Il-76 transports

Looks like each II-476 will cost ~ $115 million


To the Russians, perhaps. To India it will be multiplied with a random number generator with the number of days elapsed since signing of a contract being one of the input variables.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 09 Oct 2012 15:15

USA has relaxed restrictions for SK to allow it to "develop" missiles with 800 km & 500 kg payload that fall short of Beijing & Tokyo but covers Shanghai & entire NoKo. Here is what the new missile range looks like
Image
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-paci ... 97225.html

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 10 Oct 2012 01:17

nakul wrote:USA has relaxed restrictions for SK to allow it to "develop" missiles with 800 km & 500 kg payload that fall short of Beijing & Tokyo but covers Shanghai & entire NoKo. Here is what the new missile range looks like http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-paci ... 97225.html
no sooner has the ink on this dried, there appears an article form Bearland that a new/advanced 500KM range Brahmos is emerging... maybe true, maybe testing the waters... this is causing so much Kujil in Deaf and Dumb forum.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 Oct 2012 07:32

the licensed sale of the nirbhay turbofan engine make this a bit moot point. this is a family of engine that powers ALCMs of upto 5000km range.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 10 Oct 2012 09:44

Singha wrote:the licensed sale of the nirbhay turbofan engine make this a bit moot point. this is a family of engine that powers ALCMs of upto 5000km range.
The 36-MT Saturn Turbofan engine is capable of crusing for 5K km... hmmmm.... this is a great news indeed.

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby kmkraoind » 10 Oct 2012 17:39

EADS, BAE Call Off World's Biggest Arms Merger

"BAE Systems and EADS have therefore decided it is in the best interests of their companies and shareholders to terminate the discussions and to continue to focus on delivering their respective strategies," it said.

Securing such an enormous and complicated cross-border deal in a sector where commercial considerations are typically trumped by political, economic and national security concerns was always going to be desperately difficult.

Several sources close to the negotiations said German Chancellor Angela Merkel had opposed the proposal to combine Airbus passenger airplanes with UK defense contractor BAE.

"Merkel is against the deal but has not given reasons," a source involved in the negotiations said.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 12 Oct 2012 08:47

Looks like Mi-28N has found its first export customer

Iraq orders Mi-28 attack helicopters

Moscow and Baghdad have reached a major weapons deal for the first time since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime, with the $4.2 billion-plus pact including the purchase of 30 Mil Mi-28 attack helicopters.

An agreement to buy the aircraft and 42 Pantsir air defence systems was reached during an official visit to the Russian capital by Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki, according to a report by the RIA Novosti news agency.

member_23370
BRFite
Posts: 1103
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby member_23370 » 12 Oct 2012 09:43

Wow did not expect them to order Mi-28's. I thought they would have gone for hand me down AH-1's like pakis. Good for them.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8151
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Pratyush » 12 Oct 2012 17:28

^^^

Good for the Russies.... That the Mi 28 finally gets an export customer.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 12 Oct 2012 21:52

every jingo's wet dream - imagine what a couple squadrons of Blackjacks could do (10 each sqdn) with nirbhay and brahmos-A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyXdFefx4L0

chiragAS
BRFite
Posts: 169
Joined: 16 Nov 2006 10:09
Location: INDIA
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby chiragAS » 14 Oct 2012 11:10

Purely speculative thinking.
Now that BAE-EADS merger is off. The chances of BAE-Boeing merger may come up.

Shrinivasan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Aug 2009 19:20
Location: Gateway Arch
Contact:

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Shrinivasan » 14 Oct 2012 19:20

chiragAS wrote:Purely speculative thinking.
Now that BAE-EADS merger is off. The chances of BAE-Boeing merger may come up.

Anti Trust bogey will kick in, EU approvals are also a pain in the behind.. Possible but difficult.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 17 Oct 2012 12:05


nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 17 Oct 2012 14:00

Long Range Strike, overcoming the anti-access/area denial threat

One way to counter these anti-access/area denial threats is the use of long-range airpower. Bombers with intercontinental range require no basing-access and can launch strikes directly from the US mainland (either using direct attack weapons if it's a penetrating strike aircraft or stand-off weapons if it's not). With sufficient numbers, a robust bomber force can deliver sustained strike capability deep inside enemy airspace, holding all points on the map at risk to aerial attack.


Intercontinental Bomber + Long Range ALCMs seems to be the new mantra for the big boys. Most war simulations start with forward air bases being neutralised by cruise missile attacks. The ability to inflict "minimum unacceptable damage" by conventional weapons is the best deterrent to war.

China has a need for something similar in the South China Sea. A replacement for their old H-6 should get the interwebs buzzing. Anyone who gets their bomber first???

TSJones
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3022
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby TSJones » 17 Oct 2012 21:31

Wow, get a load of General Bondarev's hair! Is he planning on running for the US Senate after retiring from the Russian Air force? Grin. Bigger grin.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4915
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Kartik » 18 Oct 2012 03:26

F-35A releases first air-launched weapon, a GBU-31 2000 lb weapon

link

Image

John
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2285
Joined: 03 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby John » 18 Oct 2012 04:55

Pratyush wrote:^^^

Good for the Russies.... That the Mi 28 finally gets an export customer.

Kenya has already received handful of Mi 28 and i believe they are being used in Somalia? Also US was hesitant to sell any attack helos to Iraq due its close ties with Iran.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Oct 2012 07:00

from the PAKDA article:

Another major aviation project, the PAK-FA fifth-generation fighter, has been experiencing technical problems with the powerplant and onboard systems. The Saturn Item 117 engine developed for the PAK-FA has suffered flame-outs, including one on the closing day of the 2011 MAKS air show. At the defence ministry's insistence, industry began working on a more advanced Item 129 model. If that proves up to expectations, it may also find way onto the PAK-DA.

--
my spider feel is PAKDA will not be as huge as a Tu22 let alone Tu160. it might go the Platypus route and be a enlarged form of basic PAKFA template featureing a large cockpit side by side and a deeper and wider internal bay to take a shitload mix of hypersonic, stealthy and wing gliding munitions for the SEAD / GHQ targeting mission. engine will likely be same 5th gen engine, and with bigger wing tanks will permit a good range.

should be a good and first addition to our bomber fleet inshallah.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Oct 2012 11:18

They said it would be between Tu-22M3 and Tu-160 not as big as the latter but not as small as the former its a strategic bomber not a tactical one. Size would be dictated if its supersonic or subsonicdesign that would have impact on size , range/fuel and payload.

US for one has opted for subsonic design for NGB taking into account its B-2 experience but with something cheaper in mind.

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 18 Oct 2012 11:27

USA is becoming increasingly conservative. It has fixed a max price of US$ 550 million per aircraft to avoid a B2 like situation.

Russia would want to have a supersonic solution since they don't envision a scenario where air superiority is assured. It needs to be big for long range, intercontinental missions that would allow flights from Russia instead of overseas bases like USA does. Budget would be a priority if they want it now. Longer time frames would allow for larger budgets & more capabilities. If they develop a marine variant, I could see IN using it as a Tu 142 replacement. The IOR is the only region that requires long legs. Overflying China & Pakistan would be suicidal for a huge lumbering bomber unless they incorporate hypersonic technology!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Austin » 18 Oct 2012 11:33

nakul wrote:USA is becoming increasingly conservative. It has fixed a max price of US$ 550 million per aircraft to avoid a B2 like situation.


Not sure if those figures would mean any thing to hungry giants like LM or NG , when was the last time these giants has ever delivered on fixed budgets when they have a bottom line and share holder to take care after.

All they need to do is to pull their strings with senators and that fixed money will easily go up by tens of millions. Keeps every one happy and in business :)

nakul
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 31 Aug 2011 10:39

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby nakul » 18 Oct 2012 11:56

I think there should be a requirement criteria with a fixed price tag on the total amount. Say, there are 10 requirements & only 6 can be met within the budget, the remaining 4 should be dropped. After the F22/F 35 fiasco, they should have learned. But what do I know about the powerful arms lobby? They will probably add 2 more requirements to justify doubling the budget!

The major indicator of controlling budget overruns was cutting down F 22 nos to 187. The B2 was similarly cut down to 20. Expect JSF to have less than the initial nos as well. If they repeat the same thing with the NGB, the numbers will be halaalled to make the purchase kosher.

F35 was a post Cold War plane and its cost cutting requirements indicate that USA is no longer looking at the best performance in its planes. The bombers will probably used against third world nations where air defence is expected to be weak. Apart from stealth, it should have good EW capabilities. The navy is already looking at unmanned platforms for taking over its bombing roles.

X 47
Image

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: International Aerospace Discussion

Postby Singha » 19 Oct 2012 08:25

for the kind day1-day10 missions usa does like strikes on id'ed HQ, supply chain storages, airbases , ports, power stations and such....both a barrage of cruise missiles and PGMs dropped out of UCAVs will work. I guess they will use both options.

but in a land battle or libya style situation there are many emerging fights and targets of opportunity that right now can only be tackled by manned planes or UAV operators using hellfires(UAVs need to be on station to strike, very slow transit speed...vulnerable to SAMs)...if UCAVs gain the brains to id and attack targets of opportunity, they will get a big jump in funding.

for the strategic bomber role to release ALCMs, I dont see why a manned bomber is needed.....could as well be dropped off by a UCAV that returns to base. make it smallish the size of a Su34 , fit in 4 ALCMs internally inside VLO airframe and build a lot of them to disperse the risk factor and make intercepts tough.

right now a surprise "prompt global strike" hypersonic attack on Engels AFB might wipe out most of the precious 20 Tu160 Blackjacks parked there.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests