Oz order 2 Mini CV for Super Hornets
-
maybe lionnoisy mixed up his dates lar... mixed 31march wif aprils fools day...
-
Why r we wasting our time & effort
-
Originally posted by arball:
maybe lionnoisy mixed up his dates lar... mixed 31march wif aprils fools day...
Nope, for him, every day is April Fool's day. Funny thing is that he's always the one making a sucker of himself.
-
hey we need him here..or else its gonna be boring...
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Lion noisy, u just screwed yourself there.
The RAN wants a 26,000 tonne amphibious ship to equip with V/STOL jets. Not Superbugs.
No superbug has landed or taken off from an LHD of this class, and its likely that they will ever.
Su-27/33s operate off the Admiral Kutsenov's ski-jump based on 2 qualities. It has a longer ski-jump to allow the Sukhois to pick up more airspeed, and the Sukhoi itself has a huge thrust to weight ratio (Russian Brute force engines) to do so.
The Superbug is no flanker in terms of that kinda performance. But I'd like front row seats if a Superbug does try to do a ski-jump take off. Failure or not, its gonna be a hell of a show.
''It wants a third 26,000 tonne amphibious ship equipped with vertical take-off jet fighters, a fourth $2billion air warfare destroyer and submarine-launched cruise missiles that are able striketargets thousands of kilometres away.''
the third LHD for vertical take-off jet.No news for 1st and 2 nd LHD.ok?
-
*blood spurts out*....
[for the uninitiated]
F-18 in not a vertical take-off jet.... not unless you count launching it vertically on an almost empty payload.....
-
Originally posted by tankfanatic:
hey we need him here..or else its gonna be boring...
Get a root canal. It's more entertaining and less painful than reading his mindless rambling.
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
the third LHD for vertical take-off jet.No news for 1st and 2 nd LHD.ok?
Not OK. You admit to having no information linking Superbugs to ski ramps but you carry on like a two-bob watch about this numbskulled idea. Then you turn around and demand news about the first two LHDs being for V/STOLs. I said it before, I'll say it again - HYPOCRITE.Do you see the USMC building a ski ramp and launching their Bugs off the Tarawa?
Moron.
-
Originally posted by arball:
F-18 in not a vertical take-off jet.... not unless you count launching it vertically on an almost empty payload.....
Nope - put it on inline skates, launch it with a giant rubber band and the payload can be attached by their carrying handles.
-
if hornets can be based on LHDs, i agree tt USMC would have done so already, but then again, they cant.... at least not in a viable manner
-
its not because they cant..its because its silly to launch big jet on a puny little LHD..how many superbug can be stored anyway? 2?
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
the third LHD for vertical take-off jet.No news for 1st and 2 nd LHD.ok?
Ooh, talk about an about turn... What happened to your ski-jump not for sailors to play with and skateboarding pictures?lol, talk about maximum pwnage!
-
Who wants to wager that the Superbug fully fueld, will not make pass 130kts the moment it gets off the jump? *assuming its nose wheel doesn't snap off*,
-
Super Hornet can be operated from CVN Nimitz of appro 260 m runway.
Oz mini CV of overall length 230 m.
1.Can the ski-jump board help any aircraft take off with this short runway?
You are truly being a classic lionnoisy, taking up figures and numbers and tossing them to us as if we do not know what we are talking about. Do you realize your lame attempts to defend your point only serve to worsen your situtation?
Both a construction crane and an M1 Abrams tank can weight 70 tons, but are they capable of doing the same thing?
Both a NATO 7.62mm and a AK 7.62mm have the same bullet diameter, but are they of the same power?
Firstly an LHD is NOT a mini CV, it's mission profile is quite different.
And secondly, you are forgetting this very important thing called that catapult, which the LHD does not have. The Nimitz uses catapults to fling their aircraft into the air in the limited deck space they have to launch aircraft:
Nations that have retained large aircraft carriers and high performance CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take Off But Arrested Recovery) or CTOL (Conventional Take Off and Landing) aircraft (the United States Navy, Brazilian Navy, and French Navy) are still, out of necessity, using catapults. Other navies operate STOVL aircraft, such the Sea Harrier or AV-8B Harrier II, which do not require catapult assistance, from smaller and less costly ships. The Russian Su-33 "Flanker-D" can take off from aircraft carriers without a catapult, albeit at a reduced fuel and armament load. U.S. Navy tactical aircraft use catapults to launch with a heavier warload than would otherwise be possible. Larger planes, such as the E-2 Hawkeye and S-3 Viking, require a catapult shot, inasmuch as their thrust-to-weight ratio is too low for a conventional rolling takeoff on a carrier deck.
This system is not present on the LHD.
Thirdly, the lack of an angled deck is the most obvious feature that LHDs were never meant to operate fixed winging non VTOL aircraft, because there is no way to do recovery without having a full deck turnover, and considering the limited space of an LHD, means that
-
At the very least do your homework, stop making up your own terms like "mini cv" and learn what LHD stands for:
Landing Helicopter Dock
Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD), is the US Navy hull classification symbol for multipurpose amphibious assault ships which are capable of operating helicopters and have a well deck. Examples of this kind of ship include the USN's Wasp class and the Canberra class ships which are to be built for the Royal Australian Navy.
The Canberra class ships will provide the Australian Defence Force with greatly increased naval aviation capabilities, with each ship carrying up to 24 Army and Navy helicopters.[1] These aircraft will include Army and Navy MRH-90 transport helicopters, Army Tiger helicopter gunships and Navy S-70B Seahawk anti-submarine helicopters. Although the ships will be fitted with a ski-ramp and could be certified to operate STOVL aircraft, they will not be fitted with the necessary radar to operate fixed-wing aircraft.[6]
While the tender released for the Canberra class did not specify that the ships needed to be capable of operating STOVL fixed wing aircraft,[7] it has been proposed that such a capacity be included in the final design. In 2004 a review by the Australian Parliament's Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade recommended that the Australian government should consider purchasing a small number of F-35B Lightning II for the Fleet Air Arm to operate from the Canberra class ships.[8] In March 2008 the RAN was reported to have requested that the government purchase a third Canberra class ship and VTOL aircraft. The government was reported to be unlikely to approve this request, however.[9]
The Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's recommendation was made on the grounds that STOVL aircraft would provide deployed Australian forces with air defence and close air support. Despite the slight reduction in range and payload of STOVL F-35B compared to CTOL F-35A (and C) aircraft, they are inherently flexible in terms of operation, and can provide organic close air support right at the edge of the Field of Battle Area, which land based aircraft cannot do. An order of F-35Bs for the Canberra-class could form part of the planned order of up to 100 F-35s for the Royal Australian Air Force. The Navantia design has a ski-jump included in its initial design, and is designed to operate and sustain a mixed jet and helicopter carrier air group of up to 36 aircraft for the Spanish Navy.
Where in all this do you see anything about superbugs being launched from LHDs?
But there is plenty of information about the use of STOVLs in this class of ship, which is no surprise to anybody who knows his stuff well... as Gedanken said the DUHZ factor here is astounding, but yet you somehow manage to screw this up.
-
Originally posted by tankfanatic:
its not because they cant..its because its silly to launch big jet on a puny little LHD..how many superbug can be stored anyway? 2?
So you're saying they can be launched?
-
They can't be launched, period. The SuperHornet just wasn't designed for ski-jump decks. Chances are, it will stall and crash off the deck.
-
Don't tell me - tell tankfanatic.
-
The US did test F-18 on ski-ramp launch before - from what is reported - it was a success... but the data on the distance, speed, loading is not available.Thus I would not write Lionnoisy totally off on the part that the super-bug cannot be launch off a LHD .... but then ... come a lot of question on the practical of it ....
First even we assume it can be launch ...i would expect the full lenght of the lHD must be use, so whole deck clear for just 1 plane ... ! not practial .......
Next issue is payload - i doubt it can carry much if any payload or fuel if it is to take off at that short distance with just a skip ramp !
With such slow rate of launch and low payload .... what you are launching not super bug - but super white elephant that can do nothing .... but then based on history I would expect lionnoisy to attempt to ramp a empty F-18 into enemy ..., which is again cannot do much damage and too expensive option . -
Originally posted by storywolf:
First even we assume it can be launch ...i would expect the full lenght of the lHD must be use, so whole deck clear for just 1 plane ... ! not practial .......
Next issue is payload - i doubt it can carry much if any payload or fuel if it is to take off at that short distance with just a skip ramp !
With such slow rate of launch and low payload .... what you are launching not super bug - but super white elephant that can do nothing .... but then based on history I would expect lionnoisy to attempt to ramp a empty F-18 into enemy ..., which is again cannot do much damage and too expensive option .
Moot point. The article that ST posted already puts paid to any speculation. The ski ramps would be for the F35B, if and only IF the government decided to put fixed-wing aircraft on the canberra class. If not, forget the ski ramp.As for sending a bingo Bug out, that's perfectly in line with Noisy Pussy's numbskulled idea of being in contact with the enemy and carrying your rifle by its handle. His proposals of weapon use are as useless as he is. Well, almost as useless as he is.
-
Originally posted by storywolf:
The US did test F-18 on ski-ramp launch before - from what is reported - it was a success... but the data on the distance, speed, loading is not available.Thus I would not write Lionnoisy totally off on the part that the super-bug cannot be launch off a LHD .... but then ... come a lot of question on the practical of it ....
First even we assume it can be launch ...i would expect the full lenght of the lHD must be use, so whole deck clear for just 1 plane ... ! not practial .......
Next issue is payload - i doubt it can carry much if any payload or fuel if it is to take off at that short distance with just a skip ramp !
With such slow rate of launch and low payload .... what you are launching not super bug - but super white elephant that can do nothing .... but then based on history I would expect lionnoisy to attempt to ramp a empty F-18 into enemy ..., which is again cannot do much damage and too expensive option .
It would behoove you not to pay heed to the "possiblility" of his ideas, because they are almost always mutally exclusive from the feasibility of them.Such as running for his life by rendering himself defenceless carrying his rifle by the SAR scope, fitting grunts with inline skates, crashing UAVs and launching non- STOVL from LHDs... all these can be possibly done but the soundness of such plans leave more questions to be answered on the general ability of their suggestor to use common sense.
Pretty much lionnoisy is the kind of person who climbs a tree with his underwear on his head- ie. a person who is trying to find new ways to do things without really making any direction into finding a better way of doing things- or worse, even making things worse then they were before...
I like his point on the SAR-21... in his desperate attempt to beat out any more advanced designs he insisted that grunts have to use the scope handle while "running for their lives" when it would not only leave them defenceless but is actually one of the least efficent ways to carry a rifle and run! So his "ideas" actually makes things worse!
-
Originally posted by storywolf:
The US did test F-18 on ski-ramp launch before - from what is reported - it was a success... but the data on the distance, speed, loading is not available.Thus I would not write Lionnoisy totally off on the part that the super-bug cannot be launch off a LHD .... but then ... come a lot of question on the practical of it ....
First even we assume it can be launch ...i would expect the full lenght of the lHD must be use, so whole deck clear for just 1 plane ... ! not practial .......
Next issue is payload - i doubt it can carry much if any payload or fuel if it is to take off at that short distance with just a skip ramp !
With such slow rate of launch and low payload .... what you are launching not super bug - but super white elephant that can do nothing .... but then based on history I would expect lionnoisy to attempt to ramp a empty F-18 into enemy ..., which is again cannot do much damage and too expensive option .yes ...it has been tested before..but only for emergency recovery only...for example if the main Carrier sunk. But Superhornet were never meant to operate from LHD.
-
Correction: the tests were done on launches, not recoveries. There's no data to show that the LHD's decks are rated for the impact of an arrested recovery, and that even if they installed arrestor cables in the first place.
Of course, all of this is still moot in light of the fact that the LHDs are in no way meant to operate Bugs anyway.
-
launch and recovery dude..they recover the aircraft using emergency netting..not cable...but you are absolutley right superbuggy were not meant for LHD
-
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/us-firms-lobby-india-re-offsets-on-fighter-deal-01614/
"Given that the lightweight fighter order is intended to replace some of India’s 300-350 aging and dangerous non-upgraded MiG-21s, cutting the 126 plane order to 50-75 medium aircraft for the same amount of money seems like a bit of a leap given India’s needs on multiple fronts. The F/A-18 and Rafale also require full catapult launch facilities if used in a naval role, which would preclude its naval use on either India’s present Viraat or its next carrier, the ski-jump equipped INS Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov)."
The US Navy conducted those STOVL tests together with the F-14A, F/A-18A, and TC-2. I do not know of any tests conducted on the Larger & Slower to Acclerate Superbug. Care to share with us any links or evidence to that test?
Basically, the ski-jump consists of a curved inclined ramp installed in the
bows of the carrier. An aircraft traversing the ski-jump follows its curved profile,
and on exit, is launched into an upward ballistic trajectory. Compared to a flat
deck exit, this trajectory (for the same take-off run) can place the aircraft 200-300
feet higher in the air and, thus, provide it more height (and time) to accelerate
into forward flight. However, because of the short take-off run available on a
ship’s deck, an aircraft would normally exit from the ski-jump at a very low
speed. Should this speed be below the stalling speed of the aircraft (as it is for the
Harrier), the flying controls remain ineffective, and the aircraft will, in layman’s
terms, “fall out of the sky.”
In this respect, V/STOL aircraft have an advantage, because at low speeds,they rely not on aerodynamic controls (which require high relative air flow over
the aerodynamic surfaces), but on jet reaction controls. These controls, called
“puffers,” use hot air, bled from the engine, and allow the machine to be con-
trolled in all planes till it accelerates into an aerodynamically safe flying regime.
It was for this reason that use of the ski-jump could not be contemplated for
CTOL aircraft, under normal circumstances.It seems that everybody agrees that Superbugs can only take off from CTOL decks.