Oz order 2 Mini CV for Super Hornets

last SG · 2008-04-01T10:53:28+00:00

its in theory only, the only test i known were not even on a real ship..they done it on an airstrip modified to be a mockup of an aicraft carier...thats how...

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

That's way too logical for Noisy Pussy, arball.

Logic is irrelevant to lionnoisy, nor should you really try. Fortunately his counterpart noisylion is always willing to save us the effort of talking to him by engaging him on his level.

His posts are mostly trawl-the-net-for-articles-extract-the-bits-i-want-and-copy-and-paste-them-along-with-cute-little-pictures.

Do you think he's going to actually try to argue this thread?

Chances are he will, or he'll just abandon it quietly and start another one elsewhere.

lionnoisy SG

What is the purpose of putting a ski--jumping board ?

The question is for which aircraft,oz or US or SG!?

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?

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/fa18/index.html#TEXT1

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-18.htm

2.Oz pilot start train land in US CV.

Will Oz pilots fly oz or US planes?

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,22279837-31477,00.html?from=public_rss

Mark Dodd | August 21, 2007

AUSTRALIAN fighter pilots will be taught to land on aircraft carriers for the first time in 25 years.

A select handful of Royal Australian Air Force instructors will be chosen for lessons on how to land on US aircraft carriers flying the new F/A-18F Super Hornet fighter.

The plan, which could eventually lead to participation in US carrier-based operations, marks the first time Australian pilots have flown off aircraft carriers since the retirement of the navy's flagship carrier HMAS Melbourne in 1982.

The carrier training underscores the rapidly evolving military partnership between the US and Australian military. .....

3. http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23426783-5006301,00.html?from=public_rss

IAN McPHEDRAN

March 24, 2008 09:50pm

THE navy has produced a secret $5 billion "wish list" that includes an aircraft carrier and Tomahawk cruise missiles for its submarine fleet.

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 list comes at a time when the Royal Australian Navy can barely find enough technically qualified sailors to crew its existing fleet.

It also coincides with a push by the Rudd Government to save $1billion a year in defence costs as it ordered a new White Paper to set spending priorities for the next 20 years.

The Spanish made landing helicopter dock.

datafuser SG

It's impossible for the Super Hornet to land on the Australian LHD. The LHD has neither arresting wires nor landing aids.

Interestingly, the USMC OV-10 Broncos did fly from the USN LHA but they could not land back on it. The Broncos flew off from the LHA only to deploy to forward land bases.

Gedanken SG

The question is for which aircraft,oz or US or SG!?

It's an Australian ship - what business is it of the US or SG?

Fool.

Shotgun SG

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.

arball SG

maybe lionnoisy mixed up his dates lar... mixed 31march wif aprils fools day...

spartan_6 SG

Why r we wasting our time & effort

Gedanken SG

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.

tankfanatic SG

hey we need him here..or else its gonna be boring...

lionnoisy SG

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.

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?

arball SG

*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.....

Gedanken SG

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.

Gedanken SG

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.

Gedanken SG

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.

arball SG

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

tankfanatic SG

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?

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

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!

Shotgun SG

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*,

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

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

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

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 (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.

« Previous Page Next Page »