- Reaction score
- 21,150
- Points
- 1,010
Not if reaper doesn’t have a heated, internal weapons bay, will they carry and drop torpedos.
CH-148 Cyclone Progress
- Thread starter Kirkhill
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 969
- Points
- 1,010
Thanks, that was a misspeak on my part.
- Reaction score
- 969
- Points
- 1,010
What’s the range hit if they stay at a low enough altitude?
- Reaction score
- 21,150
- Points
- 1,010
- Reaction score
- 3,427
- Points
- 1,190
According to wiki, the Reaper weighs 4,901 lbs, has a max take off weight of 10,494 lbs, and can carry 4000 lbs of fuel, leaving 1594 lbs for payload if it is carrying max fuel (wiki also says it can carry up to 3800 lbs of payload, which would leave it with only 1793 lbs of fuel.)
A Mk-46 weight about 500lbs, so in theory it could carry two of them and still carry a full fuel load.
- Reaction score
- 969
- Points
- 1,010
OK. But the concern SKT raised was internal storage and heaing for the weapon. So, the question is, how badly is the range affected if you carry the weapon externally and fly at a lower altitude?
- Reaction score
- 10,986
- Points
- 1,160
Misery loves company:
We are not alone.
en.defence-ua.com
....
The only question is: what does work?
Corollary: how many do I need to ensure I have one working when I need it?
We are not alone.
Norway Now Demands €2.8B For 14 Troubled NH90 Helicopters Initially Bought For Just €0.5B | Defense Express
Norway offsets NH90 costs by factoring in both operations and buying new U.S. helicopters as replacements
en.defence-ua.com
....
The only question is: what does work?
Corollary: how many do I need to ensure I have one working when I need it?
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,500
- Points
- 1,160
AW101 Merlin.
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 28,635
- Points
- 1,260
Depends what you want to do with it and where.
Certain operational environments are tougher on equipment than others, so you would want to have more airframes to ensure X are available.
- Reaction score
- 10,986
- Points
- 1,160
Agreed. Have you talked about that to any accountants recently?
I love explaining that you can still make money with 10% efficient systems.
- Reaction score
- 2,693
- Points
- 1,090
Misery loves company:
We are not alone.
Norway Now Demands €2.8B For 14 Troubled NH90 Helicopters Initially Bought For Just €0.5B | Defense Express
Norway offsets NH90 costs by factoring in both operations and buying new U.S. helicopters as replacements
....
The only question is: what does work?
Corollary: how many do I need to ensure I have one working when I need it?
the Norwegians run 101s for SAR which our upgrade is to be based on
they have also replaced the NH90 with MH-60s
but are buying the type 26
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 20,243
- Points
- 1,260
I'm a landlubber but from what I have gleaned from other places isn't the 46 a bit light? Just asking cause a torpedoman I ain't
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 28,635
- Points
- 1,260
46 is a LW torp. You’re not putting a Mk48 torp in a bird to drop.
48’s are shipkillers, while the 46’s are really just ASW.
- Reaction score
- 5,491
- Points
- 1,120
100-ish pounds of HE, when exploded underwater, is enough to poke a hold in a sub.
If you read Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising" from way back when, there is mention in it of trying to aim for the stern of the submarines so that the explosion would pop the shaft seals and cause non-recoverable flooding. ****
I'll observe that just about any flooding caused by an explosion at depth in a submarine is likely to be non-recoverable flooding.
**** Tom Clancy is not necessarily an expert on Naval Tactics and weapons employment, but he made some really good guesses in his writing. I can neither confirm nor deny if this is actually a 'thing' in the tactical employment of ASW weapons.
If you read Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising" from way back when, there is mention in it of trying to aim for the stern of the submarines so that the explosion would pop the shaft seals and cause non-recoverable flooding. ****
I'll observe that just about any flooding caused by an explosion at depth in a submarine is likely to be non-recoverable flooding.
**** Tom Clancy is not necessarily an expert on Naval Tactics and weapons employment, but he made some really good guesses in his writing. I can neither confirm nor deny if this is actually a 'thing' in the tactical employment of ASW weapons.
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 28,635
- Points
- 1,260
I don’t consider accountants relevant to Military requirements.
If the SOR/SOW is written correctly it will have the requirements for availability into it. Thus the decision on which system can best be determined. Which is why I hate lowest price technically acceptable contracts, and prefer best performance or best value to the government.
Military do not make money. The key is how does one manage all the government requirements for effects with the least risk to personnel and equipment.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 20,243
- Points
- 1,260
Tom Clancy fan here as well.
- Reaction score
- 6,251
- Points
- 1,260
I agree with you that RAMD (Reliability, Availability, Maintainability & Durability) should be a fully developed section of every SOR, but, in my experience - very, very out of date - it was rarely even mentioned. The two exceptions were the CPF (RAdm Ed Healey wrote the SOR) and the CF-18 (BGen Murray Ramsbottom). My memory says that it was barely mentioned for the MCDVs or the MOWAG Vehicle (now the LAV) until the projects reached RAdm Healey's desk, then he sent the engineers back to the books to consider the "basics." My sense - again, I stress from decades ago - was that the "operators" who were the project sponsors and wrote the initial SORs hated, RAMD because it was complex and unfamiliar. My sense, also, was that there was little difference between Canadian, American and Brit "operators" in that regard.
- Reaction score
- 969
- Points
- 1,010
The Cyclone contract has availability statements. The “power by the hour” concept has been hard to manage…
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 28,635
- Points
- 1,260
During GWOT the US Army pushed the Combat Developer Course to a lot of E-5 through E-7’s and O-4 and O-5’s to try to emulate what JSOC units had been doing in their CDD shops.
The intent was to make users with current experience requirement writers, however it also left a lot of gaps in knowledge levels as a lot of items where specifically focused for COIN, rather than looking at what the Combat application was. Which led to a lot of ‘last war’ items being acquired that had limited to no utility in a LSCO against a Peer/Near Peer threat. Also money thrown at GWOT led to a lot of buy, try and throw away systems that where never well thought out.
Also I would say that fundamental lack of understanding of what a Near Peer conflict can entail was lacking in most Western Armies from Y2K on, I was the very tail end of the Cold War era soldiers, and folks younger than me most likely didn’t here about one’s job was being to kill Russians and the common threat used was ‘hoarded of screaming Red Chinese’. There where still Korean War veterans around (most retired but not all) and lesson about defenses and OHP quickly became lost with the focus on failed states, Peacekeeping and then Peace Enforcement. 9/11 focused the Armies on COIN and ‘low intensity’ combat (albeit I tend to hate that word as for the folks in combat it’s pretty intense when others are trying to kill you).
