Posted on 02/25/2005 6:28:35 AM PST by Jeff Head
Great pci of the USCG bird.
Great pic of the USCG bird.
If you click on the link and look at the table on the left side of the page, click on "Related aircraft" - Y-8. There is a great deal of info on the Y-8 variants. This a/c has been modded out in a number of ways for the PLAAF. It is quite a workhorse platform.
Multip[ly that story by many hundreds (or thousands) all across the nation.
I roger that and will definitely check it out.
However, the range of the An-12 and its Y-8 Chinese version aren't nothing to write home about, mostly because the Y-8 doesn't have provisions for external wing tanks to extend range and also the Y-8 still uses less-efficient Soviet-era technology turboprop engines. This plane will probably be use primarily as a short-range AEW platform, which means the PLAF will probably have a buy a fairly large number of them for AEW duties.
"By going with a propellor-type aircraft, doesn't that allow them to operate at a lower airspeed (less number-crunching when tracking things)? Something like this might be good for monitoring a coastal region like, say, the Taiwan Strait, where they don't need the long range or high speed. Prop planes like this tend to be a little more rugged than their jet counterparts, as well."
Signals are infinitely better at 35 to 45,000 feet. Prop planes don't get up to that altitude. Prop planes are good for intercepting some kinds of signals but those days are probably in the past.
It doesn't matter, drones are going to replace all these birds within the present decade, remote receivers and cameras plus radar, all blinked to ground controllers at the speed of light. Ain't technology great?
"Considering they've never had access to one of our AWACS aircraft, it likely didn't.
(Hint: an EP-3 is not an AWACS and is nothing like an AWACS.)
I'm actually sort of shocked this thread made 15 posts without someone claiming Clinton gave them the AWACS."
This comment is 100% fallacious. P-3's were/are used in the Navy, replacing the Super Constellation (the best plane ever) as the primary AWACS craft of the Navy. Presumably you, Strategerist, are talking thru your hat or were in the Air Farce which used KC-135's and lived prettily at Kadena while the other services sweated it out in VN.
"When was the last war, that we didn't fight it for economic profit?"
Well, where do we start? Going in reverse, the current conflict with Iraq, previously the conflict with Afghanistan, before that (let's skip Klintoon's adventure in Kosovo), Iraq 1, VN, Korea, WWII, WWI, the Spanish American War, the Civil War - do you want more? There was no profit in any of these; a lot of lives lost and that's the key thing. Maybe some corporations made some money producing weapons of war, is that your problem? If so, you are on the wrong web site.
A sitting duck for a Carrier Battle Group.
"The EP-3E isn't an AWACS."
Hey Tommy, do you know what the leading E stands for? Obviously not.
Nope,I haven't seen anything in it's specs to suggest it has STOL capability.Even if it was,they would aiming at the moon to deploy the Y-8 AEW off a carrier-if they indeed plan on a carrier based system,they would probably go for helo based ones(like the KA-31) or resurrect the Soviet Yak-144.About the radar system,very little clear info is available.It probably is not the Zhuk(they already have it),so it may have commonality with the Erieye.My own educated guess for the role of such a system is that it will be used for networking with naval systems(like the Chinese Type-052C class) in the South China sea,while the A-50 AWACS handles the heavy duty stuff.
"You are right...and I believe the Chinese, once they get into the carrier business (and I believe it will be sooner rather than later), will opt (I believe) for the fixed wing variant."
Do you think they will in a big way? between our sub superiority, the sunburn missile (which everyone apparently has), I don't see what the benefit to them is of deploying a platform which will surely be more vulnerable than ours now is.
For that matter what is the US able to do about mach-2 anti-ship missiles that fly 9 feet over sea level?
Electronics(as in gathering electronic intelligence)???
that guy isn't gonna kill an awacs, unless he flies into it.
First of all,people have to know that only the USN operates carriers the way it does.Even the Royal navy's carriers have a support role to American carriers.So when Chinese carriers come online,their job will be primarily to provide air-defence to the PLAN fleet & long-range anti-ship capability(both from the carrier & the jets it carries).They will have only a secondary land attack capability to begin with.So there's little chance that you will see a 'Mao Ze Dong' take on a 'Ronald Reagan' anytime soon.I don't see China planning to build a Nimitz like carrier atleast till after 2015 for sea dominance,when their escort fleet would have grown in size & sophistication & when they have gained in experience operating carriers.The Chinese do need carriers given the fact the need to control their every busy trade routes as well chokepoints like the Spratly islands & the Malacca straits(to challenge the Indian navy).
PS-IIRC,only Russia,China & India operate supersonic anti-ship missiles like the Sunburn.
Can we now crash one of our jets into their spy plane?
i recall reading that Iran was buying or had bought some sunburns, and also the US had bought some non-nuke sunburns from russia a few years ago.
thx for your comments, you know more about this than I do...
I've heard about the Iran rumours,but have seen nothing solid to back it up.If Iran indeed got the Sunburn,it would have freaked out the US military & it's Arab allies,but that hasn't seen to have happened.So my own guess is Iran hasn't got the Sunburn(though I could be wrong).About the USN,they got a downgraded version of the KH-31 Krypton missile to use for testing.The Krypton is an airlaunched anti-ship/anti-radar weapon similar to the Sunburn.But anyway,the variants sold to the USN were said to have underperformed,so the whole experiment proved disappointing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.