Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Seems like the first shipment of S-400 to China suffered damages due to storm.

quote:

At the Surface Navy Association's (SNA) 2017 National Symposium held last year, Lockheed Martin was showcasing a Mark VI patrol boat scale model fitted with an erectable launcher for four missiles at its stern. This conceptual model was representative of an unmanned Mark VI patrol boat fitted with LRASM next generation anti ship missiles.

quote:

The F-35 Patuxent River Integrated Test Force team brings the U.S. Marine Corps’ F-35B one step closer to initial operational test and evaluation as they wrap up testing of the F-35B STOVL envelope with sloped surface vertical landing tests January and February at Marine Corps Auxiliary Landing Field (MCALF) Bogue, N.C.

quote:

General Dynamics NASSCO started sea trials for the U.S. Navy’s newest Expeditionary Sea Base, the USNS Hershel “Woody” Williams (ESB 4) on January 17, 2018.USNS Hershel “Woody” Williams is the Navy’s second ESB ship. The 784-foot-long ship will serve as a flexible platform to support a variety of missions, including air mine countermeasures, counter-piracy operations, maritime security and humanitarian missions. The ship will provide for accommodations for up to 250 personnel, a 52,000-square-foot flight deck, fuel and equipment storage, and will also support MH-53 and MH-60 helicopters with an option to support MV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft. Currently nearing the end of construction, the ship will be delivered to the U.S. Navy in February 2018.

quote:

At the Surface Navy Association's (SNA) 2018 National Symposium held in January near Washington DC, Navy Recognition learned from Raytheon and Kongsberg that the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) will be test fired from a U.S. Army HEMTT truck during RIMPAC 2018 exercise this summer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevinkin

Yeah, the tail section seems awfully similar to a novices eye. I always have wondered what advantage that configuration imparts. Stability for the electronics array maybe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevinkin

Yeah, the tail section seems awfully similar to a novices eye. I always have wondered what advantage that configuration imparts. Stability for the electronics array maybe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: strykerpsg

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevinkin

Yeah, the tail section seems awfully similar to a novices eye. I always have wondered what advantage that configuration imparts. Stability for the electronics array maybe.

Like most ideas not originated by that country, copy what seems to work. They have done so with the vast majority of their weapons, whether copying Russian, European or US. Why go out on a limb and make something different when the E-2D sets the current standard for quite a few navies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: strykerpsg

Like most ideas not originated by that country, copy what seems to work. They have done so with the vast majority of their weapons, whether copying Russian, European or US. Why go out on a limb and make something different when the E-2D sets the current standard for quite a few navies.

quote:


zardinuk

I don't understand why they copy it piece for piece, couldn't they have used a more modern-looking airframe? It's almost like it's meant to be a slap in the face. They had the opportunity to build a brand new plane and they chose an old aircraft carrier cargo-plane design, that the disc was added to.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

quote:

ORIGINAL: strykerpsg

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevinkin

Yeah, the tail section seems awfully similar to a novices eye. I always have wondered what advantage that configuration imparts. Stability for the electronics array maybe.

Like most ideas not originated by that country, copy what seems to work. They have done so with the vast majority of their weapons, whether copying Russian, European or US. Why go out on a limb and make something different when the E-2D sets the current standard for quite a few navies.

It's not so much "copying" as "building something with identical requirements". Go compare the Quest Kodiak to the Cessna Caravan. There's some basics that you're going to end up with regardless of your design process.

The actual tail design comes from the fact that the E-2 is designed to do flat, skidding turns to keep the radar level and improve performance. With an AESA you could electronically level your scan volume, at the expense of power/accuracy (ESAs have a power fall-off as the beam gets further from array normal.