Página 6 de 6

Enviado: Qui Fev 28, 2008 7:19 pm
por Bolovo
Alitson escreveu:
Bolovo escreveu:Na minha opnião esse S-2 vão ser andar para trás. Vejam que só a gente tá se arriscando a isso.
Não há risco. Made In Israel, sem Enrolaer... :lol: :lol:
Não é esse o problema, o problema é que continua sendo um avião velho e quanto mais o tempo passa, mas caro fica (igual um gráfico exponencial). E SE ele entrar em operação algum dia na MB, ele já vai ter que ter um substituto sendo pensado, mas sabe como a MB é, né? Vai ficar 30 anos voando, sem ter um substituto, até cair as asas ou o A-12 afundar. Na questão aviação de asa fixa a MB chorou e chorou para consegui-la, quando conseguiu, fez tudo errado.

Mas vamos voltar ao assunto do tópico, ok? Se quiser me responder, faça em algum tópico sobre a MB! :wink:

Voltando ao assunto... esse Kitty Hawk é uma tentação...

Imagem

BAY OF BENGAL (Sept. 5, 2007) - USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) transits in formation for a joint photo exercise during exercise Malabar 07-2. Kitty Hawk Carrier Strike Group is taking part in exercise Malabar 07-2, a multinational exercise that includes naval forces from India, Australia, Japan, Singapore, and the United States.


Os indianos devem estar sonhando com um desses... :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 5:40 am
por P44
um navio com 47 anos...realmente é o delirio... :roll: :roll:

Keel Laid: December 27, 1956
Launched: May 21, 1960
Commissioned: April 29, 1961

http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cv63.htm

um monstro de consumo de $$$$$ com quase 50 anos de serviço ...a sentença de morte de qualquer marinha (á excepção da USN que já o está prestes a abater..)

Menos Bolovo, menos.... :mrgreen:

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 6:00 am
por Alcantara
Mas antes de morrer, ainda pode representar a sentença de morte de muita força aérea pelo planeta Terra a fora, ainda.

São 80 aeronaves que podem ser postas em qualquer lugar do mundo.


Abraços!!! 8-]

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 6:42 am
por P44
Tirando a USN nenhuma marinha tem "guito" para operar aquilo [000]

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 8:43 am
por P44
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Indi ... 817693.cms


India says no to logistics deal with US, for now

NEW DELHI: India is keen to further bolster defence ties with US, with more joint combat exercises to build interoperability, procurement of military hardware and pacts to ensure secrecy and end-use verification of American defence equipment.

But the Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), proposed by US over two years ago on the lines of its Access and Cross-Servicing Agreements signed with over 60 countries, is off the Indian radar screens for now.

This, in short, is the Indian defence establishment's message for visiting US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates. With the UPA government still floundering to propel the Indo-US civil nuclear deal towards a successful conclusion, it does not want to further antagonise the Left by signing the LSA.

Under the LSA, Indian and American militaries propose to provide each other with logistic support, refuelling and berthing facilities for each other's warships and aircraft, spares and other services on a reimbursable or equal-value exchange basis. With CPM leader Prakash Karat describing the LSA as ''far more dangerous than the nuclear deal'' in its implications, the agreement has been stuck in the Cabinet Committee of Security for the final approval for quite some time now.

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 11:29 am
por Carlos Mathias
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Cadê os apostadores que jogaram tudo num "arreia calça" da Índia?
Como é que a Índia pôde resistir? PA de graça, F-18E, tecnologia nuclear...

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 12:09 pm
por capsantanna
Carlos Mathias escreveu::lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Cadê os apostadores que jogaram tudo num "arreia calça" da Índia?
Como é que a Índia pôde resistir? PA de graça, F-18E, tecnologia nuclear...
Queria ver se oferecessem para o Brasil.
Será que recusaríamos?
:?: :twisted: :?: :twisted: :?: :twisted: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 12:14 pm
por PRick
capsantanna escreveu:
Carlos Mathias escreveu::lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Cadê os apostadores que jogaram tudo num "arreia calça" da Índia?
Como é que a Índia pôde resistir? PA de graça, F-18E, tecnologia nuclear...
Queria ver se oferecessem para o Brasil.
Será que recusaríamos?
:?: :twisted: :?: :twisted: :?: :twisted: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Sim, como já recusamos outros 02 que foram oferecidos. Não dá para operar um bicho desse tamanho. :(

[ ]´s

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 1:24 pm
por Alcantara
Pior que é verdade. Já recusamos a oferta, duas vezes, de super porta-aviões norte-americanos... [000]


Abraços!!! :wink:

Enviado: Sex Fev 29, 2008 1:35 pm
por Bolovo
Pois é, são SUPERCARRIERS, só tem UM país no mundo que tem cacife para operar tal coisa, que são os EUA...

Enviado: Sáb Mar 01, 2008 2:48 pm
por Morcego
cb_lima escreveu:
Sintra escreveu: Tem todo o sentido, os Indianos limitaram-se a baixar as calcinhas... :twisted:
Mas era chato dizer isso em publico. :wink:
Heheheheheh... [018]

Eu achei que estava lendo errado, porque estava pensando...

Ue? Nao era obrigacao deles ter feito isso de qualquer maneira? O que ficaram fazendo esse tempo todo?

Ainda ha tempo para eles pegarem o PA da USN :lol:

Da-lhe russos... pelo visto estao se graduando na arte de passar sucata para os outros...

Realmente nao tem outra solucao... porque no fim das contas, americanos, russos, franceses sao todos a mesma porcaria (com estilos um pouco diferentes, mas tudo farinha do mesmo saco).

Por mais que demore a licao 'e que temos que fazer os nossos mesmo!!

[]s
CB_Lima
Tem quem chame de PAIS SÉRIO ainda.

Enviado: Sáb Mar 01, 2008 2:50 pm
por Morcego
P44 escreveu:um navio com 47 anos...realmente é o delirio... :roll: :roll:

Keel Laid: December 27, 1956
Launched: May 21, 1960
Commissioned: April 29, 1961

http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cv63.htm

um monstro de consumo de $$$$$ com quase 50 anos de serviço ...a sentença de morte de qualquer marinha (á excepção da USN que já o está prestes a abater..)

Menos Bolovo, menos.... :mrgreen:
é VERDADE, mas ao menos se gasta com algo que se navega, o pior custo é o de PAGAR PARA NÃO TER.

Enviado: Seg Mar 03, 2008 12:21 pm
por P44
http://www.en.rian.ru/analysis/20080227/100165793.html

Arguments for completing modernization of the Admiral Gorshkov
16:32 | 27/ 02/ 2008

Print version

MOSCOW. (Military commentator Nikita Petrov for RIA Novosti) - U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates arrived in India Tuesday amid rumors that he is to offer the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk as a sweetener if New Delhi buys 65 Boeing Super Hornet fighters.

The fighters are Boeing's offering in a fierce competition with European and Russian rivals for a multi-billion deal to supply the Indian Air Force. Other bidders include the Russian MiG-35 Fulcrum F, the French Rafale, the European Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon, and the Swedish Grippen.

According to a report from the Texas-based private intelligence group Stratfor, the "gift" would be designed to ensure victory at the tender, because an aircraft carrier without deck aircraft is a harmless floating airfield. It could also woo India away from Russia, which is currently refitting the air-capable cruiser Admiral Gorshkov for the Indian Navy at the Sevmash shipyard in northern Russia.

The U.S. probably needn't go to such lengths. New Delhi has its own reasons for terminating the contract with Sevmash, which is lagging behind the agreed schedule and has set back the completion date from 2008 to 2012. The deadline may well be postponed again, because the shipyard has spent the $750 million India had provided for the carrier's modernization and has no money for completing the job.

The problems did not appear yesterday. The deadlines and the allocations stipulated in the original 2004 contract were unrealistic from the beginning, and even prompted the resignation of David Pashayev, the shipyard's director.

Pashayev sharply criticized the Russian officials for what he saw as an inability and unwillingness to drive a harder bargain over price, and for putting unbearable responsibility on the shipyard, which had not received regular budgetary allocations for the projects it was already doing for the government (at the time it was working on a new nuclear submarine, the Yury Dolgoruky.)

Not unlike the rumored gift of the Kitty Hawk, the sale of the Admiral Gorshkov was above all a political decision, designed to tie New Delhi to the Russian defense sector. But it was also the only way of getting funds for its normal maintenance.

By 2004 the Admiral Gorshkov had been standing in Sevmash docks for nearly seven years, and nobody knew what to do with it. Built in the early 1980s, the Kiev class carrier no longer fitted the requirements of the Russian Navy.

Designed to host custom built but never mass produced, Yak-38 fighters, the Admiral Gorshkov's flight deck was too short for the Russian Navy's standard MiG-29K Fulcrum and the Su-33 Flanker, both designed to use a ski-jump for carrier takeoff. Russia lacked $2.5-$3 billion to add the modifications these aircraft needed for carrier takeoff.

When India showed an interest in the carrier, Russia was only too glad to be rid of it. The contract for modernization and the supply of MiG-29K fighters (India will pay for their ski-jump) and other equipment promised major profits and long-term cooperation with India.

The total contract was estimated at $1.5 billion, about half of which was to be spent on developing modernized MiG-29K deck fighters capable of day/night, all-weather, year-round operation in any climate, including tropics with ambient temperatures up to +35° C. The ship itself was sold to India at the price of scrap metal, $150-$200 per metric ton.

Just as David Pashayev had warned, however, the contract hugely underestimated the true costs of modernization. The plunge of the dollar and the subsequent surge in prices of equipment and skilled labor, as well as high requirements set by the Indian Navy, made the project unrealizable.

The Admiral Gorshkov will have French, Israeli and Indian equipment, which will have to be adjusted to the Russian-made systems. This entails a series of R&D projects and trials. More funds are to be spent on the improvement of the MiG-29K, which can engage not only air, but also surface and submarine, targets.

Indian pilots saw the MiG-29K at the Zhukovsky airfield near Moscow two years ago, and were impressed. Additional funds are needed for its mass production, however, and New Delhi has refused to pay a rupee more. Moreover, it has threatened to fine Russia for failure to deliver on time.

As usual, Russian officials found a scapegoat and fired Sevmash director Vladimir Pastukhov, but this has neither improved the situation nor added money for completing the ship's modernization. In an apparent effort to encourage the Indians to pay more, the Russian press cited an anonymous source from the Russian General Staff, who said that if India terminated the contract the carrier would be turned over to the Russian Navy.

However, nobody has calculated how much this would cost Russia - in fines for breach of contract, adjusting the carrier to Russian requirements, and damage to Russia's prestige.

Sadly, the debacle of the Admiral Gorshkov is not an isolated incident. Several years ago, the St Petersburg-based Baltic Shipyard and its subcontractors postponed the delivery of three multi-role frigates to the Indian Navy for more than a year because of failure to adjust a new air defense system to the ships' fire control systems. On that occasion the Indians demanded about $40 million in damages, and it took Russian officials much time and effort to convince them to withdraw their claims.

Later Russia had problems with a diesel submarine modernized for India because of a malfunctioning missile system.

Next India refused to take delivery of a modernized version of the Il-38, a naval patrol and anti-submarine warfare aircraft, because its technical and tactical characteristics did not fit Indian requirements.

Even if America did offer the Kitty Hawk, New Delhi might well refuse the gift. It was built in 1961 and has been declared too old for the U.S. Navy. The Admiral Gorshkov is not only younger (she was laid down in 1978 and launched in 1982), but fully equipped. The U.S. carrier will need to be supplied with new power plants and support, navigation and other systems. Nobody can say now how much this would cost.

In other words, by rejecting the Admiral Gorshkov, India could fall into a new trap with the USS Kitty Hawk. But that would not be Russia's problem.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.