It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New SAS NH - 90 Stealth Helicopters

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2004 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo
In 2000 the whole fleet was grounded due to rotor faults.in 1999 three dead downed in Leicestershire.2002 two dead in downed in the Atlantic.febuary 2004 downed in the Antartic.And yesterday in Czech republic.All except the last were due to aircraft failer not pilot error.
The MOD should start reviewing a suitable replacement to the Lynx sooner rather than later.Just cos it`s in the British Army/Navy doesn`t make it the best.
thats probably due to an old made aircraft.
now its a perfectly good aircraft.what i want proof the whole fleet was grounded cause i rem seeing them flying in 2000.
also it might be a technical fault OR conditions. now the US navy is losing ospreys every time they fly are they changeing it?
dont doubt this aircraft,it is perfectly good.
and its in the british army and the RN because they recognise some good helicopters.



Around March-May 2000 fleet recalled for modification.The US are crap at flying choppers
.Its still in service due to accountants and planners who cannot forsee future conflicts until they happen running the MOD.You put an Apache up against the Lynx no contest.You put a black hawk against the Lynx been in both and now which one l prefer No contest.Sorry l speak from a little bit more knowledge than you
The Army and Navy have to put up with the equipment given.




posted on Sep, 10 2004 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo

Around March-May 2000 fleet recalled for modification.The US are crap at flying choppers
.Its still in service due to accountants and planners who cannot forsee future conflicts until they happen running the MOD.You put an Apache up against the Lynx no contest.You put a black hawk against the Lynx been in both and now which one l prefer No contest.Sorry l speak from a little bit more knowledge than you
The Army and Navy have to put up with the equipment given.
yes recalled for mods not grounded. exscuse me? an apache versus a lynx? i had this argument before and you know what they aint even in the same class. dont even bother trying to compare the two.
a black hawk cant have missiles on the side a lynx can.
also so what i think a faster,more agile,more realiable helicopter is always the better choice. now how come no one who has worked on the lynx as far as iv spoken to ,30 in total, said anything bad about it.
the army and navy dont just "put up with the equipment given" if so the SAS would have SA-80's in the CT squad but wait the SAS CT squd use HK MP5's would you look at that a case of chosen equipment.
also the army and navy gets the best gear it can for its troops and if you dont believe that then im afraird you dont know the army/navy.



posted on Sep, 10 2004 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo

Around March-May 2000 fleet recalled for modification.The US are crap at flying choppers
.Its still in service due to accountants and planners who cannot forsee future conflicts until they happen running the MOD.You put an Apache up against the Lynx no contest.You put a black hawk against the Lynx been in both and now which one l prefer No contest.Sorry l speak from a little bit more knowledge than you
The Army and Navy have to put up with the equipment given.
yes recalled for mods not grounded. exscuse me? an apache versus a lynx? i had this argument before and you know what they aint even in the same class. dont even bother trying to compare the two.
a black hawk cant have missiles on the side a lynx can.
also so what i think a faster,more agile,more realiable helicopter is always the better choice. now how come no one who has worked on the lynx as far as iv spoken to ,30 in total, said anything bad about it.
the army and navy dont just "put up with the equipment given" if so the SAS would have SA-80's in the CT squad but wait the SAS CT squd use HK MP5's would you look at that a case of chosen equipment.
also the army and navy gets the best gear it can for its troops and if you dont believe that then im afraird you dont know the army/navy.



The fleet was grounded until the mods were carried out and fully tested.You as in previous threads have an idealistic view of the British Army from an outsiders point of view that makes you believe what you want to theirfore an arguement with you everybody else is wrong.The Apache no matter what you believe is far better than the Lynx.
The Black Hawk has a ESWS (External Stores/Weapons System) which enables it to carry Hellfire.2.75mm Rockets,Stingers,7.65mm,20mm and 30mm Cannons.The ESWS can also carry four 230 gallon fuel pods.The SAS use the Augusta 109E for the CRW wing movements.As for equipment just look at the recent Iraq conflict :@@.



posted on Sep, 10 2004 @ 09:49 PM
link   







posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Actually the NH90 is not "stealthy" as we consider "stealth"; certainly not nearly as stealthy as the Lockmart F-117 -- which isn't all tha stealthy by today's standards.

Understand that "stealth" means "low signature", and there're four signatures to think about.

Infrared (IR) is probably the most important, since most MANPADS are typically IR-seekers, and you can't hit an aircraft if it's not giving off a lot of heat from its engines. The NH90 has attenuated IR signature, true; but it's not really that much better than the AH-64D Apache Longbow, which uses a 1970's technology "black hole" IR suppression.

Radar cross section (RCS) is important if you don't want the aircraft acquired by a radar seekers, and there's simply no way you can keep the main rotor and tail rotor from standing out like a sore thumb.

Visual signature is simply how big the aircraft is and how it's painted. The NH90 is as big and obvious as a Sikorsky Blackhawk, which is big. You want a low visual signature, you will need a little UCAV.

Aural signature is how loud it is, and the chief perpetrator is the tail rotor, not the main rotor.

[I was sure the Bell-McDonnell Douglas Superteam was going to win the LHX program in 1990, because they proposed an aircraft with the M-D "NOTAR" or "no tail rotor" system. Of course, Superteam lost to First Team (Boeing Sikorsky) and the "winner" was the RAH-66 Comanche (which, as you probably know, was cancelled -- thank God).]

But the bottom line is that, although you can attenuate any of the modern helicopter signatures, except for some of the really new designs like the Boeing CRW, you're not really going to get a "stealthy" helicopter.

And, FWIW, all of the modern ASE and C4I2 whizz-bangs the NH90 has, such as the MIL-1553 bus, multipurpose displays instead of steam gauges, FLIR, etc. (except for FADEC), the Apache Longbow has, too, and so does the UH-60.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo



The fleet was grounded until the mods were carried out and fully tested.You as in previous threads have an idealistic view of the British Army from an outsiders point of view that makes you believe what you want to theirfore an arguement with you everybody else is wrong.The Apache no matter what you believe is far better than the Lynx.
The Black Hawk has a ESWS (External Stores/Weapons System) which enables it to carry Hellfire.2.75mm Rockets,Stingers,7.65mm,20mm and 30mm Cannons.The ESWS can also carry four 230 gallon fuel pods.The SAS use the Augusta 109E for the CRW wing movements.As for equipment just look at the recent Iraq conflict :@@.

so?
i dont really like the british army! thats why i have the SBS picture instead of the SAS one. NO WONDER THE APACHE IS BETTER ITS A F**KING GUNSHIP! there is no point comparing the two. can an apche send in a section of troops? NO its designed for ground support.
the black hawk only advantage is that it is cheap. also the SBS use the lynx and sea king to move around cause they are good sea vehicles and also if i am ignorant and think the lynx is great does that mean the FAA is ignorant? also those claims are not proven .marines and army get realiable equipment.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo



The fleet was grounded until the mods were carried out and fully tested.You as in previous threads have an idealistic view of the British Army from an outsiders point of view that makes you believe what you want to theirfore an arguement with you everybody else is wrong.The Apache no matter what you believe is far better than the Lynx.
The Black Hawk has a ESWS (External Stores/Weapons System) which enables it to carry Hellfire.2.75mm Rockets,Stingers,7.65mm,20mm and 30mm Cannons.The ESWS can also carry four 230 gallon fuel pods.The SAS use the Augusta 109E for the CRW wing movements.As for equipment just look at the recent Iraq conflict :@@.

so?
i dont really like the british army! thats why i have the SBS picture instead of the SAS one. NO WONDER THE APACHE IS BETTER ITS A F**KING GUNSHIP! there is no point comparing the two. can an apche send in a section of troops? NO its designed for ground support.
the black hawk only advantage is that it is cheap. also the SBS use the lynx and sea king to move around cause they are good sea vehicles and also if i am ignorant and think the lynx is great does that mean the FAA is ignorant? also those claims are not proven .marines and army get realiable equipment.



The Lynx until the Apache enters full service this year is our only anti tank gunship
.If the British Army was to go to war today against a modern well equiped Nation we would get a serious arse kicking.The only reason the Lynx has a moderately good record is due to the lack of combat experiance in a theatre against a modern army.Look at the Falklands we had a wake up call then that only lasted a few years, now we are only capable of small conflicts against poorly equiped forces.The British Army only use the Lynx because the MOD cannot finance are replacement.It``s either that or the SBS swim everywhere



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo
The Lynx until the Apache enters full service this year is our only anti tank gunship
.If the British Army was to go to war today against a modern well equiped Nation we would get a serious arse kicking.The only reason the Lynx has a moderately good record is due to the lack of combat experiance in a theatre against a modern army.Look at the Falklands we had a wake up call then that only lasted a few years, now we are only capable of small conflicts against poorly equiped forces.The British Army only use the Lynx because the MOD cannot finance are replacement.It``s either that or the SBS swim everywhere

what? hell on the way down to national canoeing i seen one take off from an army base outside newcastle.
oh really? and i suppose next your going to tell me that the sea king is crap to?
really man the lynx is fine. also we dont fight modern armies cause we dont go to war. oh yeah just keep thinking that seriosly the lynx is fine you can think what you want about the lynx but frankly the MOD's veiw on it and the FAA's and im sure the AAC's veiw on it is that it is a fine aircraft much better than most helicopters.
also the SBS uses more modes of transport than the SAS do.
the british army and marines ,why does no one care about marines?, can fight a modern army quite efficently. hell the logistic core of the marines is the best in the world. they can supply a landing force for 6 weeks with out replesnishment.
yeah the falklands was a wake up call, EVERY WAR IS! also the falklands did not last a few years.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
NO WONDER THE APACHE IS BETTER ITS A F**KING GUNSHIP!


Apache was crap in kosovo. The US crashed about 3 and didn't bother with the rest.

And having seen Lynx in action on exercise, all i can say is, well, damn, the RN pilots are bloody amazing. Maybe that'll be me one day, thinking of RN/RM for a career.



Either that or the SBS swim everywhere

They probably could. Seaborn insertion for them can be anything from a RIB to a kayak to swimming.

[edit on 11-9-2004 by minimi]



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by minimi

Originally posted by devilwasp
NO WONDER THE APACHE IS BETTER ITS A F**KING GUNSHIP!


Apache was crap in kosovo. The US crashed about 3 and didn't bother with the rest.


lol yeah man. still its a nice helicopter.

Originally posted by minimi
And having seen Lynx in action on exercise, all i can say is, well, damn, the RN pilots are bloody amazing. Maybe that'll be me one day, thinking of RN/RM for a career.

yeah ma mates gona be one as well. me gopna be an articifer, dont worry about those choopers working !


Either that or the SBS swim everywhere

They probably could. Seaborn insertion for them can be anything from a RIB to a kayak to swimming.

[edit on 11-9-2004 by minimi]
yup never truer words spoken.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo
The Lynx until the Apache enters full service this year is our only anti tank gunship
.If the British Army was to go to war today against a modern well equiped Nation we would get a serious arse kicking.The only reason the Lynx has a moderately good record is due to the lack of combat experiance in a theatre against a modern army.Look at the Falklands we had a wake up call then that only lasted a few years, now we are only capable of small conflicts against poorly equiped forces.The British Army only use the Lynx because the MOD cannot finance are replacement.It``s either that or the SBS swim everywhere

what? hell on the way down to national canoeing i seen one take off from an army base outside newcastle.
oh really? and i suppose next your going to tell me that the sea king is crap to?
really man the lynx is fine. also we dont fight modern armies cause we dont go to war. oh yeah just keep thinking that seriosly the lynx is fine you can think what you want about the lynx but frankly the MOD's veiw on it and the FAA's and im sure the AAC's veiw on it is that it is a fine aircraft much better than most helicopters.
also the SBS uses more modes of transport than the SAS do.
the british army and marines ,why does no one care about marines?, can fight a modern army quite efficently. hell the logistic core of the marines is the best in the world. they can supply a landing force for 6 weeks with out replesnishment.
yeah the falklands was a wake up call, EVERY WAR IS! also the falklands did not last a few years.



The Lynx is 30 yrs old.Time to wake up.The MOD has admitted that the Lynx is in need of replacement sooner rather than later.I don`t have a problem with the British Army l am proud to have been part of it.But to put it in terms you will understand its like having the best chef in the world putting him in a kitchen with a can of bake beans and a camping stove.They may be the best beans you`ve ever tasted but if you serve them to someone that eats five star you gonna get a problem.

By the way when l stated that we had a wake up call that only lasted a few years l was refering to the fact the MOD and the govt learn`t that we had to equip for conflicts that may never happen but if they did we were prepared.Doesn`t look good going to war on a cruise ship and loosing a lot of good men (some of which l served with) on a boat in the middle of a shooting gallery and that was when they realised that the Excocet missile existed.Unfortunately the MOD and the govt have not changed.One day if you two (minimi & devil) get to serve you will not no what it is like to face War without the basic equipment you need to survive



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo


The Lynx is 30 yrs old.Time to wake up.The MOD has admitted that the Lynx is in need of replacement sooner rather than later.I don`t have a problem with the British Army l am proud to have been part of it.But to put it in terms you will understand its like having the best chef in the world putting him in a kitchen with a can of bake beans and a camping stove.They may be the best beans you`ve ever tasted but if you serve them to someone that eats five star you gonna get a problem.

By the way when l stated that we had a wake up call that only lasted a few years l was refering to the fact the MOD and the govt learn`t that we had to equip for conflicts that may never happen but if they did we were prepared.Doesn`t look good going to war on a cruise ship and loosing a lot of good men (some of which l served with) on a boat in the middle of a shooting gallery and that was when they realised that the Excocet missile existed.Unfortunately the MOD and the govt have not changed.One day if you two (minimi & devil) get to serve you will not no what it is like to face War without the basic equipment you need to survive

so is the tornado has the RAF replaced them? no the initial design is 30 years old and STILL there is nothing close to matching it.
also dont belive that the army just gives you a rifle and half the gear u need, this isnt the russian army. most marines iv spoken to couldnt get less gear, they gave him 6 smokes for a 8 hour mission into a non combat area.
also just saying this the bitish forces are quite well equiped.
so your saying the MOD hasnt put the exercet missile into its list of missiles? i doubt it
they knew about the exercet BUT they didnt know the argentinains would use thier airbase outside the combat zone. we learned leasons there BUT we have grown stronger. id rather go to war in a cruise ship to a RFA ship!
the MOD has changed its doing the best job it can.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo


The Lynx is 30 yrs old.Time to wake up.The MOD has admitted that the Lynx is in need of replacement sooner rather than later.I don`t have a problem with the British Army l am proud to have been part of it.But to put it in terms you will understand its like having the best chef in the world putting him in a kitchen with a can of bake beans and a camping stove.They may be the best beans you`ve ever tasted but if you serve them to someone that eats five star you gonna get a problem.

By the way when l stated that we had a wake up call that only lasted a few years l was refering to the fact the MOD and the govt learn`t that we had to equip for conflicts that may never happen but if they did we were prepared.Doesn`t look good going to war on a cruise ship and loosing a lot of good men (some of which l served with) on a boat in the middle of a shooting gallery and that was when they realised that the Excocet missile existed.Unfortunately the MOD and the govt have not changed.One day if you two (minimi & devil) get to serve you will not no what it is like to face War without the basic equipment you need to survive

so is the tornado has the RAF replaced them? no the initial design is 30 years old and STILL there is nothing close to matching it.
also dont belive that the army just gives you a rifle and half the gear u need, this isnt the russian army. most marines iv spoken to couldnt get less gear, they gave him 6 smokes for a 8 hour mission into a non combat area.
also just saying this the bitish forces are quite well equiped.
so your saying the MOD hasnt put the exercet missile into its list of missiles? i doubt it
they knew about the exercet BUT they didnt know the argentinains would use thier airbase outside the combat zone. we learned leasons there BUT we have grown stronger. id rather go to war in a cruise ship to a RFA ship!
the MOD has changed its doing the best job it can.



So what makes you qualified to comment on the MOD?
Again the govt does not allow the funding the military needs to replace ageing aircraft.The Eurofighter is bein introduced to replace the Tornado
but is well overdue.If we had to go it alone against even Iraq we would not have acheieved success.
In the Falklands we underestimated the Arges.It was only the training and guts of the guys on the ground that turned the outcome around.Yes at the time of the Falklands we were not prepare to defend against the exocet it was not fully understood who we were up against.You no the seven P.
PROPER PLANING AND PREPERATION PREVENTS PISS POOR PERFORMANCE.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo



So what makes you qualified to comment on the MOD?
Again the govt does not allow the funding the military needs to replace ageing aircraft.The Eurofighter is bein introduced to replace the Tornado
but is well overdue.If we had to go it alone against even Iraq we would not have acheieved success.
In the Falklands we underestimated the Arges.It was only the training and guts of the guys on the ground that turned the outcome around.Yes at the time of the Falklands we were not prepare to defend against the exocet it was not fully understood who we were up against.You no the seven P.
PROPER PLANING AND PREPERATION PREVENTS PISS POOR PERFORMANCE.

what makes me qualified to comment? nohing i dont need to be qulified to comment, its freedom of speach also im in the cadet forces iv seen and exsperineced and listened to some things in my life.
also we wouldnt go up against iraq cause we dont go to war against small countries for no reason,also yeah we wouldnt win cause we would be outnumbered.only the training of the guys on the ground that changed it? what about the complete nulification of arginian air force in the combat zone was totaly down to ground fores huh?
also the navy giveing air and ground support didnt help did it?
also you know that any plan doesnt survive the first encounter. also we werent prepared cause we arent a warlike people we have an armed forces for defense not offense.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo
In the Falklands we underestimated the Arges.It was only the training and guts of the guys on the ground that turned the outcome around.Yes at the time of the Falklands we were not prepare to defend against the exocet it was not fully understood who we were up against.You no the seven P.
PROPER PLANING AND PREPERATION PREVENTS PISS POOR PERFORMANCE.


Maybe that war was so close run because at the time, the Royal Navy were geared up to being the Anti-Submarine Warfare Arm of NATO rather than being a force that could fight alone in 'conventional' navy combat (Not sinking Soviet Submarines).

I'm sure governments not wanting to spend money on carriers and whatnot had something to do with it too.



posted on Sep, 11 2004 @ 10:31 PM
link   
damn looks ugly but hey what do I know
Also helicopters for special forces don't need to be too stealthy. they just need a helicopter to get to their target then they can do a halo jump no one will pick them up that way.



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo



So what makes you qualified to comment on the MOD?
Again the govt does not allow the funding the military needs to replace ageing aircraft.The Eurofighter is bein introduced to replace the Tornado
but is well overdue.If we had to go it alone against even Iraq we would not have acheieved success.
In the Falklands we underestimated the Arges.It was only the training and guts of the guys on the ground that turned the outcome around.Yes at the time of the Falklands we were not prepare to defend against the exocet it was not fully understood who we were up against.You no the seven P.
PROPER PLANING AND PREPERATION PREVENTS PISS POOR PERFORMANCE.

what makes me qualified to comment? nohing i dont need to be qulified to comment, its freedom of speach also im in the cadet forces iv seen and exsperineced and listened to some things in my life.
also we wouldnt go up against iraq cause we dont go to war against small countries for no reason,also yeah we wouldnt win cause we would be outnumbered.only the training of the guys on the ground that changed it? what about the complete nulification of arginian air force in the combat zone was totaly down to ground fores huh?
also the navy giveing air and ground support didnt help did it?
also you know that any plan doesnt survive the first encounter. also we werent prepared cause we arent a warlike people we have an armed forces for defense not offense.



Guys on the ground is a term used to describe the men that are there not sat in Whitehall.It includes army,navy airforce it is a term used to descirbe the people in the zone
Yes there`s freedom of speech but you are a fifteen year old in a discussion board just cos you read a few books and spoke to a few people dosn`t make you qualified to dismiss other peoples views and make you the god that no`s it all
.Plans don`t survive the first encounter please
.And you`ve never experiance 2 para on a Saturday night



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo
Guys on the ground is a term used to describe the men that are there not sat in Whitehall.It includes army,navy airforce it is a term used to descirbe the people in the zone
Yes there`s freedom of speech but you are a fifteen year old in a discussion board just cos you read a few books and spoke to a few people dosn`t make you qualified to dismiss other peoples views and make you the god that no`s it all
.Plans don`t survive the first encounter please
.And you`ve never experiance 2 para on a Saturday night

look im not familiar with pongo talk,also you cant really call the navy or airforce ground guys.
hey! iv went out and iv done a few things im not some asshole that thinks ,"oh i read all of chris ryans books im an exspert"!
i wasnt dismissing your view just cllearing up a few inacuracies and showing my view. or am i not qualified to do that?
yeah plans DONT surivice the first encounter because the enemy never does what you thought it would do.
yeah iv never exsperienced the para's on a saterday night, im 16 ! i dont go around ppicking fights wi the paras imm not that stupid!



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by weirdo
Guys on the ground is a term used to describe the men that are there not sat in Whitehall.It includes army,navy airforce it is a term used to descirbe the people in the zone
Yes there`s freedom of speech but you are a fifteen year old in a discussion board just cos you read a few books and spoke to a few people dosn`t make you qualified to dismiss other peoples views and make you the god that no`s it all
.Plans don`t survive the first encounter please
.And you`ve never experiance 2 para on a Saturday night

look im not familiar with pongo talk,also you cant really call the navy or airforce ground guys.
hey! iv went out and iv done a few things im not some asshole that thinks ,"oh i read all of chris ryans books im an exspert"!
i wasnt dismissing your view just cllearing up a few inacuracies and showing my view. or am i not qualified to do that?
yeah plans DONT surivice the first encounter because the enemy never does what you thought it would do.
yeah iv never exsperienced the para's on a saterday night, im 16 ! i dont go around ppicking fights wi the paras imm not that stupid!



Sure everybody intitled to there view points.Good plaining is all about anticipating the enemies next move very similar priniciple to chess.I didn`t mean that the para`s are fighting every sat night just that they have a more aggresive attitude to fellow man
which can be seen when they are bonding



posted on Sep, 12 2004 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by weirdo
Sure everybody intitled to there view points.Good plaining is all about anticipating the enemies next move very similar priniciple to chess.I didn`t mean that the para`s are fighting every sat night just that they have a more aggresive attitude to fellow man
which can be seen when they are bonding

yeah bt how many times has HQ thought wrong? many a time its almost imposssible to anticipate thier next move.
i know the para's dont go out fighting every saterday night i meant they are very scary especcially thier path finder unit.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join