Wednesday, March 04, 2015
Ducted Fan Airplanes.
This is a post in response to comments made about concept art that I posted talking about Future US Army Aircraft.
Ducted Fan Aircraft have NUMEROUS advantages over tilt rotors. Why this type of vertical lift has been abandoned is beyond me but it should have been followed and with today's tech it would work perfectly.
A small flight of fancy. Imagine a two seat AH-1Z sized airplane with ducted fans to operate off our amphibs to operate as escorts to the MV-22! That would be a procurement/development project for the Wing that I could get behind...but...the F-35.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
I dont think that answering in this point mean something =) If this is not the thing you would like to hear - well, ok.
ReplyDeleteI would expand it and enlarge the US Coast Guard as well.
ReplyDeleteThere are may things I do not like.. but they are still true. That is called reality.
ReplyDeleteOf course we all have different viewpoints towards this reality, that color our views. Including mine.
These colors do not however change the truth, just the perception.
Even if most of what you say is actually true you still are trying to pull the wool over our eyes and I think you are doing it on purpose.
Look at your theories on this murder.. sure most CAN be true, but by excluding even the option of Putin ( and the people around him) being responsible tells us everything we need to know about your intent!
You can not 100% discount Putin having a responsibility.. no one can , like no one can actually prove he did order the murder!
It is also telling you actually use the trick mentioned in articles about Putins media strategy: Trow as many theories out there you can , so the truth gets drowned in all the flak.
Brilliant.. but rather evil.
"How big should a nation's military be?" Big enough to satisfy your defense needs, not less not more. what are your defense needs, well thats where things get interesting, should the US stand for europe by doing the primordial job our governments ought to make? should we intervene in other countries? etc. etc.
ReplyDeleteHow to pay for it? Well vote baiting politicians should remember that defense is the basic expending of all governments, not healthcare, not education, but defense, if your country gets busted you dont have none of the other nice perks of the welfare state.
Maybe that was true in the past, I can not tell, but ISIS surely is the biggest menace on the Middle East now.. and it is at least partly a SA/ Turk construct.
ReplyDeleteBut beyond that I agree with your analogy.
"we need more European cooperation on defense." The idea of a european army its one I like, I personally think its our only way to remain relevant as a continent in the mid term future. sadly there are some countries messing things around, cough cough england.
ReplyDeleteIm looking forward to hearing your opinion.
"but that is an other aspect of the Swiss system, that also lead to canceling buying sufficient fighter jets." The swiss electorate has very good sense when it comes to economics, but voting down their grippens was a mistake.
ReplyDeleteThe surface of the ducts can provide lift in addition to the wings. Naturally most of the lift would come while the ducts are rotated or mostly rotated to the horizontal or forward motion.
ReplyDeleteI do not want to fight two major regional wars but I do want to prepared to if that becomes necessary. I say that it is necessary for the US to maintain that ability because if we back off it will invite chaos and a power vacuum.
ReplyDeleteThere was a book that you did a post about called "The Hundred Year Marathon" I read it and it outlined China's goal to overtake the US as the main military and economic super power by 2049. I fear that if the US doesn't keep a strong military and economy China will succeed in that Goal. That is by far the main reason I think the US needs to maintain a military capable of fighting two major regional wars posturing towards Russia and China. "To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace"-George Washington. Or if you prepare the old Latin term Si vis pacem, para bellum "If you want peace, prepare for war".
With regards to comments about the brigades/divisions of the US Army in the 1980s and the idea that we should have 50 brigades in 12 or 16 divisions:
ReplyDeleteRemember that the legacy formations of the 80's/90's/early 200's (Army of Excellence) lacked the reconnaissance capabilities of the current BCTs. For instance, an AOE armored brigade had 116 M1 tanks, 56 M2 Bradleys, and 7 M3 Bradleys, whereas the new ABCT has 87 M1 tanks, 89 M2 Bradleys, and 27 M3 Bradleys. That's 179 vehicles in the former vs. 203 vehicles in the latter. There's significantly more capability there. Additionally, the AOE brigade had no organic artillery battalion, thus the division had to provide it from the DIVARTY fires brigade. Currently, the plan is for divisions to have both: each brigade will had its own fires battalion and the division will have a DIVARTY brigade. On top of all of this, the blue force digitalization of army formations makes them way more capable in the C2ISR department.
Now don't get me wrong, I'd love to have 50 army brigade combat teams, but this just isn't responsible or necessary. Currently, the army is downsizing from ~45 BCTs to ~34 BCTs; however, these BCTs all have 3 maneuver battalions, whereas the older group of 45 had 2 maneuver battalions (aside from SBCTs). I think 35 - 38 brigade combat teams with 3 maneuver battalions is the sweet spot. 16 armored brigades, 9 stryker brigades, and 11 infantry brigades would allow the army to respond immediately at any time with 5 armored brigades, 3 stryker brigades, and 4 infantry brigades with another 5-3-4 immediately following. Remember, the 2003 invasion of Iraq was done with 1 Mar Div, essentially 4 armored brigades and 3 infantry brigades.
IMO for the USMC they should downsize drastically to better fit their mission. Focus on MEUs and MEBs. Make them as deployable as possible and make these your formations, not these awkward divisions. The Marines produces excellent light infantry. It needs to not EVER do what it did in 2003 again, which is raid the entire Corps for enough equipment and vehicles for I MEF to conduct a division sized mechanized assault. The army does mechanized assault way better than the Marines. Have a USMC of 140,000 or even 120,000 fast deploying amphibious infantry and take the cut number (from current levels of 190,000, so the difference would be 50,000 - 70,000) and give the army that end strength so they can form more armored brigades. You know, the only survivable formations in a high intensity conventional war.
Offtopic
ReplyDeletea vid of Assad's army in fight in Syria
Noticable lack of artillery, at my take.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVMR6AHh4BA
Offtopic
ReplyDeleteI can't stop watch this amazing photo of USS Makin Island's Marines ! Bgggg
https://www.facebook.com/CENTCOMRussian/photos/pb.113412992062483.-2207520000.1425497965./819773101426465/?type=3&theater
taken here
https://www.facebook.com/CENTCOMRussian/photos_stream?ref=page_internal
Here's an interesting video of global commerce, and where the highest volume is (to-from China) starting with the Strait of Malacca.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtffmxJmehs
And here on the Makin.
ReplyDeletehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-2kQ7_XEAEtWNu.jpg:large
You always have to consider airstream speed with the ducted fan as it has small disc area it needs to move air at increasingly high velocity in comparison to a larger rotor disc of the conventional rotor. So considering chinook size ,air velocity under those 4 ducted fans would be very high indeed.
ReplyDeleteLook to Disk Loading for reasons why. It's also part of the reason Sikorsky recently discussed why they didn't necessarily consider the S-97 a best-fit for Navy requirements.
ReplyDeletethat makes no sense. the S-97 has the same basic design as the Kamov and its a great ship board helicopter. if the S-97 isn't a good fit for Navy requirements it has to be for a different reason...oh and i did a google on disc loading and don't know what that has to do with this....there are engines powerful enough to get the job done today and remember the application i'm pitching...a AH-1Z sized airplane with ducted fans used as an attack/escort platform.
ReplyDeleteThe US and its counter-terrorism center have been spouting that nonsense about Iran for years, but if you look at any report on the "terrorist threat" it focuses on al Qaeda primarily, Af-Pak, Yemen and Somalia, and Iran ISN'T EVEN MENTIONED. So it's BS. Also if you look at the "most wanted" lists, same deal. No Iranians.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, we have US/Israel attacks on Iran, including cyberattack Stuxnet, assassinations, border raids etc. And the US has major military bases in Qatar and Kuwait, and close political ties (and a few bases) in Saudi Arabia, all major financiers of al Qaeda, al Nusra etc.
Well just read the comments and as a cough cough "Englishman" lets talk about a "European" solution.
ReplyDelete1. Bless the Dutch Marines, but they are not intergrated in to the Royal Marines they excercise together but not one takes the Comando training thag defines a Royal Marine Comando.
2. The German Army has used broom sticks on APC's this year in its front line reaction forces. It only operates 4 Helicopters, only 30 of its Typhoons are servicible. The German military only gets 1.1% of GDP spent on it.
3. Apart from France no European country supports any form of experditionary warfare. In Afganistan German and Belgium soldiers were not allowed to go out of their bases after dark, bless.
So before anybody wishes for an EU Armed forces be very careful what you wish for. As an example in the intelligenceworld were "cold" wars are fought all the time you have 4 eyes (UK/USA/Canada/Australia) and then UK/USA eyes only. It sums up how after many years experiance the USA does not trust Europian Governments so why should the UK trust them with our defence. We have long memories of standing alone against Hitler, The Kaiser and Napolian. We'll look after ourselves thanks.
I agree, third maneuver battalion per BCT is essential. However, at least two divisions will have only two BCTs each by this summer and possibly more cuts on BCTs by 2017 but I suppose I'm getting off track.
ReplyDeleteCorps must be more expeditionary to remain good at their traditional role, but he Navy don't got enough damn ships! Must also focus more you say on MEU And MEB sized elements.
AH-1Z weight class ducted fan would need 2-3 times the engine power of a helicopter too verticaly take off .
ReplyDeleteDisc size hence disc loading has great deal to do with VTOL craft,ducted fan might be great for propulsion in forward flight but is very inneficient at lifting vertically and hover not to mention that downwash speeds would make landing outside concrete or metal surface landing pad high risk due to all the high speed debris flying around.
F35 is 50% lift fan and needs cca 3.3 times more power per lb or kilo than a helicopter.to take off.Even with much larger lift fan disc you would still be at a great disadvantage .
That is why lift fans are now mostly envisioned in small and light UAVs
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5351930fe4b0b045e6869b80/t/543ed16be4b0983640ed3503/1413402988905/hover+efficiency+vs+disc+loading.PNG?format=750w
Very nice find!
ReplyDeleteIf that is meant as a reason to not buy these Gripens then it is very short sighted.
ReplyDeleteFirst of wars are seldom fought alone, so having something to add to the whole can be very advantageous.
Second, specially for a neutral nation it is very important to be able to at the least police its own skies instead of having to rely on neighbors and wile doing so lose neutrality. Look at Austria's history, it was forced to be neutral for a long time and for a wile lacking aircraft. They bought Saab Drakens with only guns, no missiles, so rather limited. But they did not buy them to deal with the planes of the then enemy Russia, they bought them to be able to police their own skies, escort mostly western planes out so they would not give Russia an excuse to 'help' them out with that chore.. as Russia had 'offered' on multiple times.
I might have exaggerated a lil on your first point. But I do know Dutch and British marines operate together from the same ships at times. I do not know what taking a training thag means.
ReplyDeleteOn your second point, I think that is exaggerated. The sources for the broomstick thing are Russian state controlled and one sensationalist newspaper known to be wrong more then right.
The Dutch DO have expeditionary forces, in fact it is the main thing money gets spend on at the expense of defense. We are talking 2 state of the art amphibious ships + a support ship mostly suited for this kinda operation. The Airforce has more planes flying abroad then at home, including earlier in Afghanistan and now in the Baltic. Then there is the army component in the form of an air-mobile brigade with full support, including Apaches.
The navy also has one extra lil thing, the only non nuclear submarines in the world fully capable of operating independently all over the globe. Some other nations do have longer ranged diesel-subs, but these still require supportships to be used expeditionary. I read an article by a Dutch former subcommander now tasked to coordinate these subs replacement, in it he claims these subs get used on a regular basis for intelligence gathering at the request of the US and NATO.
I do not know the situation of other European militaries in detail, but I would be surprised if the Dutch were the only ones focusing on supporting allies like this.
Sidenote, this is why the Dutch government insists on getting F35's instead of something more sensible.. to be able to work closely with allies and if some theories are to be believed because it, the F35 can carry the nukes stored on an airbase over here like the F16 can, wile the Gripen and some other planes can not. Officially these nukes are not actually here, but a former PM of ours, Ruud Lubbers let it slip about a year ago, confirming what a lot of people already suspected.
Well, we cant all be German...
ReplyDeleteBesides, British automobiles nowadays are a lot more reliable, I wouldn't mind winning the lottery so I could buy a new Jaguar XE or a Bentley.
You have to separate the issues. The issue of budget cuts is a problem with democracy, not total conscription. If they were not democratic, a hard nosed/hard arsed government would have told those voting for cuts to "go to hell" and still maintain conscription. This is the biggest problem with democracy, too many people with their own ideals and focused on the short term to make hard decisions. Look at Greece, it's basic facts that if you don't have money, you got to cut spending, but tell them that and you're out of power and Greece will still remain bankrupt.
ReplyDeleteSame with defence and democracies. Tell them the military needs money and they'll give you 101 reasons why it does not. Until someone with the mindset of Atilla the Hun comes knocking.
Did someone say ducted fan? Go to 2:00 - https://vimeo.com/38591304
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a kid we had a 1963 Jaguar Mark 2. Thing broke down nearly every week but when it ran, it ran good.
ReplyDeleteBig enough to deal with threats to itself and its vital national interests. It is hoped that their vital interests don't end at their border and that they realize that some threat require cooperation and allies. With that said, they need to be able to fulfill their obligations to their allies.
ReplyDeleteI feel sorry for the UK, Netherlands, Denmark, Italy and everyone else who followed us into Iraq and/or Afghanistan. They expended blood and treasure supporting us and what do they have to show for it? We led them on a goose-chase and betrayed their trust in our leadership. The US adventurism hastened the end of NATO or at least it being hollowed out and made into a toy army.
Understandable, there's a lot going on.
ReplyDeleteLet's split the issue into two: 1) Original question of ducted vs rotor; and 2) Coaxials.
Disk Loading is important because it represents the ease at which a rotor can produce lift. The wider the column of air supporting the rotorcraft the lower the velocity the air has to be moved to push against meaning less work is required to get off the ground. Low disk loading means more efficient hover, higher payloads vertically off the deck, better HOGE, less fuel burn, maintained for longer.
Ducts are cool. They are very efficient in a specific range and typically have higher thrust to weight, but are't shifting the same mass of air that a big broad rotor is especially at lower rotation which is where take-off and hover normally sit. The cowls are also normally dead weight at this point in the envelope. They're great if you think of them as thrusters rather than as the actual lifting device.
Analogous to HP vs Torque in cars.
Coaxials are even cooler, I love them. Rule of thumb is a heavier aircraft in a smaller footprint which is great from a naval perspective. The two counter-rotating conventional rotors make up for individually higher disk loading. I don't want to go into details why as it gets complex at this point: Solidity, inverted flows, vortex, tip speed drag, etc if you want to research. Downside is normally the physical height and problems with blade flapping.
S-97 is different again from a classic Coax. Ignore the pusher for a minute. The variable speed and the closeness of the two rotors is designed to focus/optimise the behaviour of the disks on acting more like wings in forward flight rather than moving a vertical column of air. Rigid blades are required as blade flap is understandably a more severe problem when rotors are closer. The downside of this is we lose some of the benefits of traditional Coax in making up for low disk loading on an individual rotor. Bringing the pusher back into play, it's dead weight in the hover.
Summary:
Want to hover for a long time or lift heavier loads efficiently? Large rotor disk (low disk loading).
Want to pack that into a smaller footprint? Coaxial rotors.
Want to fly further/faster? Use your rotor disk like a wing and add forward propulsion (prop, jet, ducted fan).
Personally I like the AVX proposal for FVL-TD. The combination of more traditional Coax and ducted fans approach. More efficient hover, heavier loads and small footprint than the other next gen designs, but it's not as fast or have quite the range on paper as SB>1 or V-280 should have in return. But then I usually think more in Maritime requirement terms (VERTREP/SAR/ASW) and Air Force / Army tends to have different needs.
S-97 probably sits more in the sweet spot for your AH-1Z than Ducts as I imagine you'd rather trade some of the higher speed from Ducts for some HOGE performance and more loiter / time on station?
Anyway, hope that helps.
that actually helps out quite a bit. thanks for the reply. you cleared that up nicely.
ReplyDeleteEspecially since the Marines want this new ACV. I think the USMC needs to really reflect on how they define themselves and what unique capabilities they see themselves bringing to the fight. That's not a criticism of the USMC as an organization, but given the fact that opposed beach landings against a conventional opponent aren't really practical, the USMC needs to make sure they're not a second land army. Remember that in the Gulf War buildup, the 82nd and attached M1 tanks were already in theater and combat ready by the time the first MEU docked in Saudi Arabia. The Marines are not faster at responding to worldwide crisis than XVIII Airborne Corps.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I've said it before, but maybe we could get some of the necessary end strength for more BCTs out of SOCOM. 63,000 soldiers in USSOCOM is absurd.
It still exists and is available for expeditionary warfare.
ReplyDeleteThere are more things I did not mention, like the Belgian Navy being under joint Benelux command, lead by a Dutch admiral. Or the more shamefull cooparation where The Netherlands and Belgium in the future can only patrol their airspace by doing it jointly, because 'we' are replacing 65 F16's by only 37 F35's wile the number of F16s is a major reduction from the original number.
I don't disagree with most you are saying.
ReplyDeleteThe only nuance I'd like to ad is there is an other option when you are lacking money then saving: get more and I am not actually talking about raising taxes.
In theory the Greek government should ave a lot more to spend , if almost everyone making decent money and more would not cheat on their taxes. This money seems to mostly leave Greece, leaving the nation poor as hell with more high-end SUV's and pools per capita then any other European nation except for maybe Monaco.
I am not sure at all if its possible to fix this, but they should at least try, besides the cost cutting.
On a sidenote, Greece besides being bankrupt also has one of the most well equipped militaries in Europe. They do somehow have money for that.
Noticable lack of artillery....but a full respect for all things Anti-tank.
ReplyDeleteSomeone watched Avatar too many times.
ReplyDeleteOne very important point people forget to plan for. How to pay for the army. I have always been a strong advocate of sovereign wealth funds, and their income. Countries IMO should shunt at least 1% of their budget into a selection of top returning companies for the dividends. It's an indirect legal "company tax".
ReplyDeleteHow helpful a sovereign wealth fund can be was driven home to me when the place I'm located (Singapore) published their budget. Some welfare goodies which worried people that the government was heading down a welfare state path, but what drove home the point was that they revealed that the extras will be paid from the annual returns of their sovereign wealth fund. To the tune of 5 Billion USD annually. The US has 50 times their GDP to play with, what kind of returns will the US get if they went that route? And you complain about China buying Treasury Bonds and sucking money out of the US? Suck right back and take shares in their key companies! Get the money back into the US via dividends.
What kind of army can you fund with 5 Billion more per year? An MPC is 4 million, an M-1 is about 10 million. You do the maths.
Governments have a very poor track record with picking winners.
ReplyDeleteNorways SWF has taken incredible losses on European bonds
I think during the economic crisis, everyone took incredible losses. Some more than others. It's not really a random pick, some companies do show consistent performance.
ReplyDelete"some companies do show consistent performance."
ReplyDeleteLike US Steel, General Motors, whatever Bernie Madofs investment vehicle was called....
>For about 2 decades Russia had quite a bit of (political) freedom and as far as I can tell Russians loved
ReplyDeleteAsk a russsian about 40 years, or older. Did he like the times, when he was afraid of letting his child go school? The times where his older son went to war and returned home in pieces?
The age of Democracy, 1990-2000 was an incredibly dark age, people lost their jobs, lost their will to live. Criminals rose as high as wanted. This is what "a lot of democracy" means for russians, who remember it.
Russian Culture suffered a huge hit from West during that times. TV says, that "America will help us", "America is helping us" - and on the streets gangs are raping and robbing. "US is helping us build a democracy" - and then goes humiliating First Chechen war, where politicians just fucking sold everything and A LOT of people (really a lot) lost their dads and sons for nothing. So when today your politics say that Russia needs more freedom - an older people say "f*ck you, I do not want to lose one more child". The main part of Putin's electorate - people, who are not than young already - will possible never believe in West and its ideals. They already tasted it. It lost too much for it. For nothing.
And then Putin. Yes. he banished the big freedom, you are right. But he crushed chechens in Second War, he took Oil and Gas to the government care, gave jobs to people and started rebuilding country. After a years of "Democracy" he was met like an angel, he-he. And his ratings are high, 86 percent. Russians do not afraid sanctions, we never lived good and wealthy, so why be afraid of living poor. At least there is no war. For older Russians it is already a good start.
>Using nationalism, made up enemies and a shed-load of propaganda aimed
but it is not Putin, who impose sanctions, he-he. This is not OVD but NATO, who built bases around us and something like that.
Russia is not integrated in the West world. So why Russia should not fill anxiety when NATO goes closer? If West would invite Russia in the NATO - it all could be different. But ooops - Putin already asked for it, in early years of his reign. West denied. So against whom NATO is living?
You cant deny that Russia has its own interests. The whole Ukraine mess is all about.
I am ashamed to say,.. I can not be bothered answering this whole piece, it wont do much good anyway.. but there are a few easy ones I could not resist:
ReplyDeleteYou talk about parents seeing their sons come back in pieces from war.. but then applaud fighting the Chechens.. funny...
You also forget one little... teeny weeny fact that destroys your whole 'Putin is a saint, democracy is death' argument. The first terms of Putin were relatively democratic, open to the West, building (trade) relations , giving freedom to the people. Only in his third term did Putin bring the hammer down.
History is full of leaders who turned out a blessing for their people, but the longer they stayed in power, and the more they feared losing said power the more they became a menace. Term-limits do have a good reason!
Sidenote: I saw an interview by a Dutch journalist with a paid Russian blogger yesterday explaining how that system works. Sadly the best similar description I found on the net is from source that is is a bit suspect of being partisan, but then so are the Russian sites used a lot on this blog.. So here goes:
http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/11/02/the-sad-life-of-putins-troll-army/
Not that I am implying you are actually one of them.. I don't need to, your reactions do themselves..
Sidenote 2: The same Dutch journalist also interviewed Siberian separatists inspired by the ones in East Ukraine, that want independance from Russia, since all the oil and gas is theirs.. How ironic..
"Is it fair?"
ReplyDeleteIt *Is* which is what I tend to concentrate on, rather than adding any sort of moral judgement.
From a UK point of view, I would say we get a limited amount of utility from that arrangement, interoperability is good, but providing a force that cant operate on its own is a pretty bad deal unless you have no other options (estonia ect). Arrogance on my part, perhaps.
But I dont see what advantage the UK gets from providing a brigade to die in an american division defending Berlin because Germany cant be bothered,
I do see what Latvia and Lithuania get if they each provide a Brigade, along with an Estonian Brigade, to the Defence of Estonia, and I see what the US gets providing the Division Headquarters and a few specialists to that force.
"How big should a nation's military be?"
Sufficiently
The US suffers much the same curse as the British Empire did.
Powerful enough to take on anyone, several anyones in fact, but not everyone
On the one hand, the US subsidised Western Europes Defence, on the other, it avoided fighting a nuclear war at home against the entire Eurasian continents and limited any exchange to western Europe.
Europe subsidised defence of the US rather than subsidised waging war against the US.
Agusta Westland's project Zero follows this for a high speed electric tilt rotor
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/Wlv-q_T95HA
Like so often, Owl, an interesting way of looking at it. Not realistic, because it would cripple society and in the end revert us to some medieval system where the lords fight their wars THEMSELVES wile also making their serfs leave the farm or shop to fight with them.
ReplyDeleteThe sentiment behind your post is one I like though.
On a side note: the former Dutch 'Chief of Defence', General Peter van Uhm lost his son in Afghanistan. I do not want to speak for him, but in my humble opinion based on seeing interviews it seems he did gain a deeper understanding of what his job brought with it.
The source does not mean it is wrong...I have told you what my original source was and why I chose to use this one on this blog. Sol has used Russian state controlled websites to show us info that wasn't wrong either.
ReplyDeleteIt is very telling that you did not actually deny being a Putin employed 'troll'!!
You try to avoid flat out lying?
Have fun making up more reasons to praise Saint Putin!
Can you name those numerous advantages?
ReplyDeleteI am certainly no expert but I did a quick google search because of your earlier post. There was talk about cost, small tolerances, higher drag, inability to fold for use on ships and several times they mentioned les hover capability then normal rotors. However, nothing really conclusive or 100% convincing.
It seems to me this needs more research to find out if there was a valid reason why the concept was abandoned, or who knows, maybe it is exactly what is needed.. I simply can't tell.
Dracae, that is because Iranian terrorists tend to target Middle Eastern targets while your SA hate mongers target your neighbourhood. One may cause more shit, but it's far far away from you while the other may cause less shit but is more immediate.
ReplyDeleteNot that any of them are good. It's like asking if you like a snake or a bear for a bedmate. Neither are good choices. No thanks to both of them would be the right answer.
It's a head vs heart thing. My Dutch heart wants us to have full spectrum armed forces, like I am sure many citizens in other European nations. My head understands this might be impossible, it certainly IS impossible if we are not willing to spend the money.
ReplyDeleteThe risk of one European army will be a total impossibility in using it, since it will likely take a political consensus to deploy it.
And again Don you failed... this time in geography. This will be probably a shocking news for you but still sit down and prepare yourself.
ReplyDeletePoland do not want western Ukraine, really Don stop taking your RT work to this site because you make a serious fool from yourself.
And your life will never be the same...
At the end of the day, there isnt an air war that the Swiss can win.
ReplyDeleteCorrection the Dutch Army HAD an air-mobile brigade. The 11th Dutch Air-Mobile Brigade is now under command of the Bundeswehr
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thetrumpet.com/article/10649.29487.0.0/world/military/dutch-paratroopers-integrated-into-german-army
Well that was interesting
ReplyDeleteBecause Boeing couldn't patent it?
ReplyDeleteI Remember I've read about : it's seems that such fans are far more vulnerable than conventionnal rotors.
ReplyDeleteThis is for the same rason that almost all attack helo have classic queue rotor, and not fenestron
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fenestron) , like a majority of civil chopper.
It begin to change, with light scout helicopter.. but not in US :
civil EC 135
http://img.planespotters.net/photo/281000/original/D-HGYN-ADAC-Luftrettung-Eurocopter-EC135_PlanespottersNet_281686.jpg
EC 645 military version :
http://press.eurocopter.com/sites/default/files/styles/full/public/Range/Military%20Range/EC645%20T2/exph-0118-28.jpg
US military version, UH 72 Lakota :
http://www.dcclothesline.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/uh-72a-lakota-helicopter.jpg