Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 3:02 am

johns624 wrote:
It's more like you're moving the goalposts. I'm outta here.


No worries about him. We are uses to it now. Don't hesitate to provide comments for the rest of us.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 8:23 am

johns624 wrote:
keesje wrote:
johns624 wrote:
That appears to be an M240 7.62 NATO MG and a Barrett .50BMG sniper rifle; so yes, just weapons that the crew can carry aboard.
The other thing to remember is what the #1 purpose of an MPA is--to find, track and sink enemy submarines. Anything else that you can add to the airframe is gravy, but not vital.


carry aboard? Rambo maybe & but even he needs to walk twice. The snipers are mostly for taking out engines, the heavier guns to prevent pirates, smugglers, terrorists are tempted to shoot their way out, or open fire on the incoming vulnerable inflatables coast guards / marines use to investigate / arrest.

Image
https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/mat ... bewapening

"#1 purpose of an MPA -to find, track and sink enemy submarines"

I think things changed. Few subs hunts over the last 20 yrs, not one sunk in .. who knows? The environment changed. Maybe the russian aren't out to conquer the world & create a communist world state anymore.. Typically navies are trying to stick to cold war capabilities, budgets, doctrines, traditions, air stations, jobs, but haven't seen many subs lately (25 yrs). Doesn't mean the world became less dangerous, just the requirements changed.
You posted a picture of a USCG copter with a 7.62mm NATO MG and a Barrett sniper rifle. I identified them for you. Then you turn around and post a picture of a European NH90 with a .50BMG and tell me I'm wrong. It's more like you're moving the goalposts. I'm outta here. It's hard debating with someone who constantly changes the subject and is never wrong. I'm (and many others) are still waiting for one of your "concepts" to be adopted by anyone.


It's the link in the same original post.

bikerthai wrote:
Not quite sure, but I believe here in the US, coast guard aircrafts on smuggling patrol are not armed other than what the crew carry on board.

bt


Image
https://www.guns.com/news/2013/05/23/hi ... ters-video

In Europe navy helicopters W101, NH90 have similar upgrades. https://magazines.defensie.nl/binaries/ ... 10039_.jpg

I guess in general the operational environment has become
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10171
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 10:13 am

keesje wrote:
seahawk wrote:
You do not use a gun, but a small guided stand-off ammunition.


I think operating in international waters, without proof anyone is really guilty, you quickly become an outlaw / pirat yourself when using excessive force. Global media / hate will be over you if you don't play by the rules. Specially if you use a remote drone "killer robot" and women / children are involved. Welcome 2020.

You need to contain for hours so a bigger ship / small boats can come in to arrest, investigate, take action. Still then you will have to let go mostly. It is not forbidden to sail around in international waters in a fishing with a ladder, boxes and some guns.

https://youtu.be/S19Bx5eftnU


A floating flare would do.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 12:12 pm

The logic behind an MPA aircraft stopping a pirate mother ship does not add up.

You shouldn't try to stop a ship until you have assets near by to board it. If your assets are hours away, you monitor and trail the ship until your assets arive. Those mother ships are slow and are not going anywhere fast.

If your assets wont arive in time, and the mother ship leaves the area of operation, then fine, your job is done for the day and you'll catch them the next time.

If the situation gets so dire that you have to use weapons before your other assets arrive then who cares if it's a 27mm round or an armed smart drone.

Same thing with the smuggler. One shipment getting through because your assets wont get there in time would only be a drop in a bucket. It would also mean you'd better off spending money to get more of those assets than trying to add a cannon to the MPA that would be rarely used.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
johns624
Posts: 3453
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 12:43 pm

Maybe Keesje should ask the NATO militaries to list their reasons for having MPAs. I'm sure pirates and drug smugglers would be well down the list.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 1:12 pm

johns624 wrote:
Maybe Keesje should ask the NATO militaries to list their reasons for having MPAs. I'm sure pirates and drug smugglers would be well down the list.


30 Years ago we were chasing smugglers, terrorist with our P3C's. With plotters, observers onboard, nuclear capabilities and torpedo's to sink subs. Coordinating the hell out of them. Stuck to the big MPA's until the government asked if 11 crew, nucleair Orions where the best for fishery control, environmental missions, monitoring, SAR, policing, intel, etc. The Parliament was very unpatriotic, unafraid, needed other budgets & we sold off to the Germans, Portuguese. The Brits also parked & did 8 (?) yrs without MPA's. If a more efficient, more flexible and useful platform had been available, decisions would probably have been different. If you're slowly adopting, resisting you'll by-passed.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
johns624
Posts: 3453
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 1:23 pm

keesje wrote:
johns624 wrote:
Maybe Keesje should ask the NATO militaries to list their reasons for having MPAs. I'm sure pirates and drug smugglers would be well down the list.


30 Years ago we were chasing smugglers, terrorist with our P3C's. With plotters, observers onboard, nuclear capabilities and torpedo's to sink subs. Coordinating the hell out of them. Stuck to the big MPA's until the government asked if 11 crew, nucleair Orions where the best for fishery control, environmental missions, monitoring, SAR, policing, intel, etc. The Parliament was very unpatriotic, unafraid, needed other budgets & we sold off to the Germans, Portuguese. The Brits also parked & did 8 (?) yrs without MPA's. If a more efficient, more flexible and useful platform had been available, decisions would probably have been different. If you're slowly adopting, resisting you'll by-passed.
Yes, and you also got rid of your Leopard 2 tanks. Your Walrus subs are good, but getting old and replacement plans keep getting set back. You and the Belgians can't agree on what to replace the Karel Doorman frigates with, either. The world is a rosy place in the eyes of the Dutch.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 4:25 pm

johns624 wrote:
keesje wrote:
johns624 wrote:
Maybe Keesje should ask the NATO militaries to list their reasons for having MPAs. I'm sure pirates and drug smugglers would be well down the list.


30 Years ago we were chasing smugglers, terrorist with our P3C's. With plotters, observers onboard, nuclear capabilities and torpedo's to sink subs. Coordinating the hell out of them. Stuck to the big MPA's until the government asked if 11 crew, nucleair Orions where the best for fishery control, environmental missions, monitoring, SAR, policing, intel, etc. The Parliament was very unpatriotic, unafraid, needed other budgets & we sold off to the Germans, Portuguese. The Brits also parked & did 8 (?) yrs without MPA's. If a more efficient, more flexible and useful platform had been available, decisions would probably have been different. If you're slowly adopting, resisting you'll by-passed.
Yes, and you also got rid of your Leopard 2 tanks. Your Walrus subs are good, but getting old and replacement plans keep getting set back. You and the Belgians can't agree on what to replace the Karel Doorman frigates with, either. The world is a rosy place in the eyes of the Dutch.


Agree we went to far. We shrunk the hell out of our military after the cold war. Made some flights on the P3C, looking back the Navy/MLD was successful in keeping up capability during many cost reductions. The MPA's had a strong culture, traditions, history, skills, flag waving worked. These days senior politicians are discussing new vision requiring tens of billions of investment, things might be changing..

I think an MPA 2030 won't look as an MPA 1970. Too much changed & tax payers demand flexibility for their money. Taking out a truck, speedboat or heli at night should be a capability of a E100mln vehicle in unpredictable environments. Airbus is already offering, as are Leonardo and LM. https://i.imgur.com/AGwRFr8.jpg

Image
keesje
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 5:12 pm

Wouldn't any military-only design be disadvantaged if high winged now, due to civilian crash survivability standards shifting toward low wing? Meaning, it wouldn't have a commercial civil prospect as a derivative, so would necessarily be limited to sales to the military customers.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 5:59 pm

texl1649 wrote:
Wouldn't any military-only design be disadvantaged if high winged now, due to civilian crash survivability standards shifting toward low wing? Meaning, it wouldn't have a commercial civil prospect as a derivative, so would necessarily be limited to sales to the military customers.


I think if you design a platform that can hang around for 18 hours unrefuelled, use so so runways, refuel another aircraft and carry a gun, it is hardly possible to imagine an efficient commercial derivative. 80 seats 6000nm on a turbo prop seems a small niche.

Image

The opposite is truth also, the derivatives of commercial aircraft build for speed, efficiency and 100.000 flight hours show their compromises in endurance, low level performance and mission flexibility.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:21 pm

Well, ok, true, but again if the US/Russia/China couldn't justify the costs of developing a dedicated type, in the now-more crowded/occupied marketplace I dunno how France/Germany/Benelux decide this is where to really throw funding. I'd be happy to be wrong, but this seems like a certainly high cost (possibly higher than the Japanese paid) to really deliver a complex/integrated weapons system, over possibly 70 frames.

It could only be justified, imho, if it would lead to some sort of civilian program, and/or had an acute unique need/priority for the pertinent western Euro. nations not already signed up for P-8's. Certainly, Airbus would be highly unlikely to deliver into service/IOC such a new aircraft in under 12 years (nor would any prime in the US/Europe, I think the P-8/A-400/T-7 are rough analogs). The timeline, requirements, and numbers just don't seem to work.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:45 pm

texl1649 wrote:
Wouldn't any military-only design be disadvantaged if high winged now, due to civilian crash survivability standards shifting toward low wing? Meaning, it wouldn't have a commercial civil prospect as a derivative, so would necessarily be limited to sales to the military customers.


High wing vs low wing is marginally different with respect to FAA crash worthiness. True that the low wing box will help if you are sitting on top of it. But the higher probability of fatality is in the nose and tail section which is essentially the same for either configuration.

High wing advantage of having the fuel on top, away from the tarmac, during a gear up landing might make up for the differnce in risk.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 9:03 pm

Apparently P3C/Atlantique replacement studies will start this month.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... his-month/

Apparently Dassault is pushing a big winged, long range, 3 engined Falcon 8x as a basis for an MPA..First look at the specifications, doesn't that bad. French AF ordered a militairy variant already.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 10:53 pm

How does this study's time line compare with NATO's requirements?

Does NATO have enough time to wait for the French and German decision or will they have to commit to something sooner?

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
johns624
Posts: 3453
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:49 pm

It seems like many militaries are going for the "boutique" option, and then wonder why they can't afford it. They seem to do fine with the F16, F35, etc., because there really aren't any options. The latest example that I know of is the new Dutch/Belgian frigate. They only need for total, so there aren't any economies of scale. They originally said that they wanted to buy "off the shelf". Now they say that nothing meets their particular needs. Come on, their needs can't be that specialized. At the present time, there are 3 good, relatively econimical frigates being produced. The Spanish F100, also bought by Australia and Norway, the Franco-Italian FREMM, also bought by the US as the FFGx and the Danish Iver Huitfeldt, the basis for the British Type 31. I'm sure they might want some Dutch electronics substituted, but one of the three should meet their needs.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Nov 12, 2020 1:04 am

johns624 wrote:
It seems like many militaries are going for the "boutique" option, and then wonder why they can't afford it. They seem to do fine with the F16, F35, etc., because there really aren't any options. The latest example that I know of is the new Dutch/Belgian frigate. They only need for total, so there aren't any economies of scale. They originally said that they wanted to buy "off the shelf". Now they say that nothing meets their particular needs. Come on, their needs can't be that specialized. At the present time, there are 3 good, relatively econimical frigates being produced. The Spanish F100, also bought by Australia and Norway, the Franco-Italian FREMM, also bought by the US as the FFGx and the Danish Iver Huitfeldt, the basis for the British Type 31. I'm sure they might want some Dutch electronics substituted, but one of the three should meet their needs.


True, but on the other hand Frigates are a fascinating counter example. South Korea (Incheon), Singapore, Japanese or others have bought nice frigates, affordably.

The (Euro) Fremm, after all, might be a better fit for the USN than the ridiculous projects for frigates it’s engaged in for 20+ years.

https://blog.usni.org/posts/2020/11/07/ ... tion-melee
 
744SPX
Posts: 425
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Nov 12, 2020 3:29 am

keesje wrote:
texl1649 wrote:
Wouldn't any military-only design be disadvantaged if high winged now, due to civilian crash survivability standards shifting toward low wing? Meaning, it wouldn't have a commercial civil prospect as a derivative, so would necessarily be limited to sales to the military customers.


I think if you design a platform that can hang around for 18 hours unrefuelled, use so so runways, refuel another aircraft and carry a gun, it is hardly possible to imagine an efficient commercial derivative. 80 seats 6000nm on a turbo prop seems a small niche.

Image

The opposite is truth also, the derivatives of commercial aircraft build for speed, efficiency and 100.000 flight hours show their compromises in endurance, low level performance and mission flexibility.




By my calculations the C-500 should be able to do 825 km/hr easily without having to use a thrusting APU.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:24 am

keesje wrote:
I think if you design a platform that can hang around for 18 hours unrefuelled, use so so runways, refuel another aircraft and carry a gun, it is hardly possible to imagine an efficient commercial derivative.


Of course you can. Unfortunately, since you do not have the efficiency of scale, each frame would cost 10 to 100 times a commercial derivative. Understand that 90 percent of the airworthiness certification is done with a commercial derivative.

The other thing about an 18 hour non refueling flight is that you approach a point where the amount of fuel and the structure you need to carry the fuel would reduce the amount of payload you would want to carry.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Nov 12, 2020 7:59 am

bikerthai wrote:
keesje wrote:
I think if you design a platform that can hang around for 18 hours unrefuelled, use so so runways, refuel another aircraft and carry a gun, it is hardly possible to imagine an efficient commercial derivative.


Of course you can. Unfortunately, since you do not have the efficiency of scale, each frame would cost 10 to 100 times a commercial derivative. Understand that 90 percent of the airworthiness certification is done with a commercial derivative.

The other thing about an 18 hour non refueling flight is that you approach a point where the amount of fuel and the structure you need to carry the fuel would reduce the amount of payload you would want to carry.

bt

This concept has an unussual large wing, to carry the fuel for very long flights and inflight refuelling and offer decent low level 200kts performance. In terms of certification of course this would be an entirely new aircraft. Some exxiting technologies could be used though, the TP400 engines, A380/A400/A350 cockpit and maybe A220 fuselage sections. If global sales over 25 years would 100 and cost price E200mln there is some place. But militairy projects seldom turn a "profit", there's no "income" for the operators.

https://groups.google.com/group/aviatio ... authuser=0

744SPX wrote:
By my calculations the C-500 should be able to do 825 km/hr easily without having to use a thrusting APU.

I think so, the A400M can do Mach 0.72 and cruise at 781 km/h at 30k ft. The ATPU main function would be boosting MTOW during heavy take-off, climb out, as a back up when a TP400 has failed. During normal operation the TP400s would provide all the power you need.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Nov 12, 2020 9:55 am

keesje wrote:
This concept has an unussual large wing,


Large wings will provide higher efficiency. However it does not address the fact that even with the efficiency, you are spending more fuel to lift and keep aloft a large amount of fuel in order to get your 18 hrs flight.
keesje wrote:
If global sales over 25 years would 100 and cost price


100 frames over 25 years, 4 frames per year? That's Lamborghini territory.

I've seen first hand the price difference when ordering 4 parts vs. 40 parts vs 400 parts (even if it's just a bunch of bolts). Good luck with trying to keep the price down at 4 frames per year.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:06 am

The crew stations would be placed in the front, quieter part of the cabin.

6 Multirole stations functioning as working stations for:
:arrow: Tactical coordination,
:arrow: Weapons officer / gunner
:arrow: ASW analyst
:arrow: Observer
:arrow: Air refuelling operations

High comfort, reclining seats designed and spaced to also to be used rest place during very long flights.

Crewmembers can walk to the back of the aircraft to the galley, washroom in the tail to fresh up redress.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Mon Nov 23, 2020 1:32 pm

keesje wrote:
Crewmembers can walk to the back of the aircraft to the galley, washroom in the tail to fresh up redress.


The picture shows the Lav near the front. Either way, the lav would probably be at the same location as their commerical variant if you want to reduce cost of development. The galley can be more easily be re-located to compensate for CG shifts.

Where is the mission planning area? Is it in the back with the galley? Are there additional crew rest seats in the back for additional crew for extended mission?

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Mon Nov 23, 2020 1:44 pm

bikerthai wrote:
keesje wrote:
Crewmembers can walk to the back of the aircraft to the galley, washroom in the tail to fresh up redress.


The picture shows the Lav near the front. Either way, the lav would probably be at the same location as their commerical variant if you want to reduce cost of development. The galley can be more easily be re-located to compensate for CG shifts.

Where is the mission planning area? Is it in the back with the galley? Are there additional crew rest seats in the back for additional crew for extended mission?

bt


The lavatory after the cockpit is a "standard" lavatory. The washroom in the back is bigger, in the back there is also the auxiliary cabin. https://groups.google.com/group/aviatio ... authuser=0 There is no commercial version foreseen of this concept. It is "too" dedicated for long endurance military roles. Cockpit crew rest would be in the back, or using one of the 6 high comfort crew stations. Dependent on the mission requirements, complexity, ground support, they could be used all 6 or less.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:10 pm

I see the planning area in the back. The link shows the lav/wash room in the back.

Carrying two lav would be in-efficient.

The logical place for the lav and galley would be in the back where the additional seats are. This is where non working crew member will congregate and would not want to distract the operators at the stations.

Who knows? Depending on their CG allocation, they may have move those commodity around.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
BawliBooch
Posts: 1539
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:24 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:08 am

IS the low-level loiter role really required these days? modern sensors can do most of the job from stand off altitudes right?

So the P8 looks like a shoe-in for this role right now.

Does the P8 have MAD sensors?
Mr.Kapoor's favorite poodle!
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:24 am

BawliBooch wrote:
Does the P8 have MAD sensors?


The P-8I variant for the Indian Navy has the MAD boom.

BawliBooch wrote:
IS the low-level loiter role really required these days?


You don't do low level loiter, it waste too much gas. You can patrol at medium level and use the cameras and sensors, and drop down low for a close up visual.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Nov 26, 2020 3:09 pm

bikerthai wrote:
keesje wrote:
This concept has an unussual large wing,


Large wings will provide higher efficiency. However it does not address the fact that even with the efficiency, you are spending more fuel to lift and keep aloft a large amount of fuel in order to get your 18 hrs flight.
keesje wrote:
If global sales over 25 years would 100 and cost price


100 frames over 25 years, 4 frames per year? That's Lamborghini territory.

I've seen first hand the price difference when ordering 4 parts vs. 40 parts vs 400 parts (even if it's just a bunch of bolts). Good luck with trying to keep the price down at 4 frames per year.

bt


Thinking about it, you might be right and the engine wing combination could be usefull for other applications. https://twitter.com/jdomerchet/status/1 ... 9321493514 :geek: :wink2:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14410
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Fri Nov 27, 2020 11:05 am

bikerthai wrote:
Fot a ship that size, if deadly force is needed, I'd say you'll need something bigger than a few 27 mm rounds.


A well aimed one second burst would sink that boat quite nicely unless they have a surprisingly large (surviving) crew for damage control. And cheaper than anything with a guidance package.



Best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Fri Nov 27, 2020 3:17 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
And cheaper than anything with a guidance package.


Do not disagree that a burst of canon fire, or a whole magazine worth of cannon amo may be cheaper than one small smart bomb.

My point is that the cost of the mod to put a canon in side the fuselage may not be as cost effective.

A gun pod would be the way to go.

Then the argument becomes how much practice would your crew need to be proficient enough to achieve a well aimed burst?

I would not dismiss the benefit if a gun pod. It's just that the premise for it's use may not be sound.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Fri Nov 27, 2020 5:02 pm

bikerthai wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
And cheaper than anything with a guidance package.


Do not disagree that a burst of canon fire, or a whole magazine worth of cannon amo may be cheaper than one small smart bomb.

My point is that the cost of the mod to put a canon in side the fuselage may not be as cost effective.

A gun pod would be the way to go.

Then the argument becomes how much practice would your crew need to be proficient enough to achieve a well aimed burst?

I would not dismiss the benefit if a gun pod. It's just that the premise for it's use may not be sound.

bt


The gun bay would designed in from day 1, so it wouldn't be a modification but an integral part of the aircraft design, just like the big weapons bay. Training for the weapons officer, complete crew would be mainly done in simulators. I flew in a P3C simulator 30 years ago, including smoke in the cockpit and an impressive 3D visual system. And that was before the digital revolution. I can only imagine how that would look 40 years later. https://flyawaysimulation.com/images/do ... new-22.jpg Next to that, a pass over an existing shooting range for live firing doesn't seem much of a challenge. https://www.blogbeforeflight.net/2018/0 ... range.html

The gun could be slaved to one of the turrets, guided by the AESA radar and trajectory would be realtime calculated with all speed, wind, temperature, distance and target track info available. Multiple ammunition types could be selected, for airburst, penetration or just fountains/holes.

The C-500 would be an MPA and has a sizeable dedicated weapons bay in front of the gun bay. Typical options, dependent of the mission could be torpedo's, missiles, dept charges, rafts, cruise missiles, drones, whatever comes up in the next 40 years.
Image
keesje

Image
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... edos_3.jpg

The weapons aft bay could initially house the Mauser, but in time it could be replaced by a precision directed energy weapon (DEW), when those become practical, available for precision targetingand e.g. missle interception. The ATPU could provide electrical for that, as explained in post #31. Next to power, cooling, structure would be in place. https://sciexaminer.com/news/global-dir ... 47666.html
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sat Nov 28, 2020 5:28 am

That is an impressive weapons bay.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Tue Dec 01, 2020 5:15 pm

keesje wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
But that brings us to the heart of this discussion. Should they go on with the current concept of MMA aircraft or go to a less capable aircraft and put more money into UAV?

It does make keesje evaluation more complicated.

From a logistics stand point, it is much easier to stand up a drone augmented squadron, fewer "pilots" to train and maintain.

bt


We have seen increasing numbers of UAV's for decades and they seems most successful as flying sensors. There will be more and better ones, adding new roles. Replacing all MPA's seems far out. UAV's tend to be single role rather than multi role. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... l_vehicles

An MPA like the Beagle also has terrain mapping, target acquisition and surveillance roles. But there is so much more:

:arrow:ASW: dropping patterns of sonobuoys, in harms way: launch dept charges, torpedo's
:arrow:Air to Surface missions, target acquisition, launch TAURUS, Exocet like weapons, air launched drones.
:arrow:Medevac, via the aft cargo door, 4 brancars and medical personnel can be taken onboard.
:arrow:Passenger transport, up to 20 people can be seated, troops, maintenance crew, evacuees, exchange crews
:arrow:Search & Rescue, 4 observers can be facilitated, the wide aft door enables life rafts to be air dropped. https://youtu.be/T1AqFUrmrlE
:arrow:A Beagle like multi role MPA will be able to refuel thirsty (SAR) helicopters and other aircraft. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN1bAJnMTx0
:arrow:High value /urgent cargo. Via the aft door door 4 pallets, ~4t can be loaded, locked. (maintenance equipment, medicines, weapons, etc.)
:arrow:Forward deployments, UN mission , policing missions, unscheduled crisis area interventions
:arrow:Special operations. This type of MPA would be an agile, FBW, high powered aircraft, giving support with BK-27, TRIGAT-LR, ect
:arrow:Preventing piracy, robbery in international waters, for hours. Until ships clear the area or help arrives. https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-pi ... the-world/

While UAV's provide great value and have unique capabilities, they lack the capabilities and flexibility to take over many, most multirole MPA missions.
Creating a fleet of tankers, cargo, passenger aircraft, gunships, patrol, SAR and ASW aircraft to do the same tasks seems a past paradigm.

Image
keesje


Agree with others that multirole is/will be dead soon. What would be the cost of this MPA? My cheapest bet is $50mil a bird. TB2 is 5 millions a unit. For 50 million you could have an swarm of 10 UCAV's able to fly for 24 hours with each assigned to an specific role without the big risk of having to call the loss of life at the 8 o'clock news.

Edit: I saw you posted an figure of 200mil, so make that an swam of 40 UCAV's. So, no brainer...
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Tue Dec 01, 2020 6:46 pm

JonesNL wrote:
keesje wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
But that brings us to the heart of this discussion. Should they go on with the current concept of MMA aircraft or go to a less capable aircraft and put more money into UAV?

It does make keesje evaluation more complicated.

From a logistics stand point, it is much easier to stand up a drone augmented squadron, fewer "pilots" to train and maintain.

bt


We have seen increasing numbers of UAV's for decades and they seems most successful as flying sensors. There will be more and better ones, adding new roles. Replacing all MPA's seems far out. UAV's tend to be single role rather than multi role. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... l_vehicles

An MPA like the Beagle also has terrain mapping, target acquisition and surveillance roles. But there is so much more:

:arrow:ASW: dropping patterns of sonobuoys, in harms way: launch dept charges, torpedo's
:arrow:Air to Surface missions, target acquisition, launch TAURUS, Exocet like weapons, air launched drones.
:arrow:Medevac, via the aft cargo door, 4 brancars and medical personnel can be taken onboard.
:arrow:Passenger transport, up to 20 people can be seated, troops, maintenance crew, evacuees, exchange crews
:arrow:Search & Rescue, 4 observers can be facilitated, the wide aft door enables life rafts to be air dropped. https://youtu.be/T1AqFUrmrlE
:arrow:A Beagle like multi role MPA will be able to refuel thirsty (SAR) helicopters and other aircraft. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN1bAJnMTx0
:arrow:High value /urgent cargo. Via the aft door door 4 pallets, ~4t can be loaded, locked. (maintenance equipment, medicines, weapons, etc.)
:arrow:Forward deployments, UN mission , policing missions, unscheduled crisis area interventions
:arrow:Special operations. This type of MPA would be an agile, FBW, high powered aircraft, giving support with BK-27, TRIGAT-LR, ect
:arrow:Preventing piracy, robbery in international waters, for hours. Until ships clear the area or help arrives. https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-pi ... the-world/

While UAV's provide great value and have unique capabilities, they lack the capabilities and flexibility to take over many, most multirole MPA missions.
Creating a fleet of tankers, cargo, passenger aircraft, gunships, patrol, SAR and ASW aircraft to do the same tasks seems a past paradigm.

Image
keesje


Agree with others that multirole is/will be dead soon. What would be the cost of this MPA? My cheapest bet is $50mil a bird. TB2 is 5 millions a unit. For 50 million you could have an swarm of 10 UCAV's able to fly for 24 hours with each assigned to an specific role without the big risk of having to call the loss of life at the 8 o'clock news.

Edit: I saw you posted an figure of 200mil, so make that an swam of 40 UCAV's. So, no brainer...


It would be a no brainer if those UCAV's would carry a serious AESA for areal control, launch exocets, torpedo's, dept charges, rescue rafts. Launch cruise missiles, drones thousands of miles away to enter hostile environments, move 20-25 people or 4t of special pallets, deploy into 3rd world countries, move patients, refuel fighter aircraft, SAR helicopters or MPA's. airdrop special forces, supplies, keep smuggler, war lords or terrorist at gunpoint, coordinate missions and cruise the oceans to respond to anything unexpected for a day.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
JonesNL
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Dec 02, 2020 5:57 am

keesje wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
keesje wrote:

We have seen increasing numbers of UAV's for decades and they seems most successful as flying sensors. There will be more and better ones, adding new roles. Replacing all MPA's seems far out. UAV's tend to be single role rather than multi role. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_u ... l_vehicles

An MPA like the Beagle also has terrain mapping, target acquisition and surveillance roles. But there is so much more:

:arrow:ASW: dropping patterns of sonobuoys, in harms way: launch dept charges, torpedo's
:arrow:Air to Surface missions, target acquisition, launch TAURUS, Exocet like weapons, air launched drones.
:arrow:Medevac, via the aft cargo door, 4 brancars and medical personnel can be taken onboard.
:arrow:Passenger transport, up to 20 people can be seated, troops, maintenance crew, evacuees, exchange crews
:arrow:Search & Rescue, 4 observers can be facilitated, the wide aft door enables life rafts to be air dropped. https://youtu.be/T1AqFUrmrlE
:arrow:A Beagle like multi role MPA will be able to refuel thirsty (SAR) helicopters and other aircraft. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN1bAJnMTx0
:arrow:High value /urgent cargo. Via the aft door door 4 pallets, ~4t can be loaded, locked. (maintenance equipment, medicines, weapons, etc.)
:arrow:Forward deployments, UN mission , policing missions, unscheduled crisis area interventions
:arrow:Special operations. This type of MPA would be an agile, FBW, high powered aircraft, giving support with BK-27, TRIGAT-LR, ect
:arrow:Preventing piracy, robbery in international waters, for hours. Until ships clear the area or help arrives. https://www.marineinsight.com/marine-pi ... the-world/

While UAV's provide great value and have unique capabilities, they lack the capabilities and flexibility to take over many, most multirole MPA missions.
Creating a fleet of tankers, cargo, passenger aircraft, gunships, patrol, SAR and ASW aircraft to do the same tasks seems a past paradigm.

Image
keesje


Agree with others that multirole is/will be dead soon. What would be the cost of this MPA? My cheapest bet is $50mil a bird. TB2 is 5 millions a unit. For 50 million you could have an swarm of 10 UCAV's able to fly for 24 hours with each assigned to an specific role without the big risk of having to call the loss of life at the 8 o'clock news.

Edit: I saw you posted an figure of 200mil, so make that an swam of 40 UCAV's. So, no brainer...


It would be a no brainer if those UCAV's would carry a serious AESA for areal control, launch exocets, torpedo's, dept charges, rescue rafts. Launch cruise missiles, drones thousands of miles away to enter hostile environments, move 20-25 people or 4t of special pallets, deploy into 3rd world countries, move patients, refuel fighter aircraft, SAR helicopters or MPA's. airdrop special forces, supplies, keep smuggler, war lords or terrorist at gunpoint, coordinate missions and cruise the oceans to respond to anything unexpected for a day.


There are UCAV's in development that have an payload of ~1500kg which will be in service the next couple of years. Those will cover a much larger range of the missions like launching ALCM's, torpedo's, and all the weaponry that you mention. Only thing that's left from your proposal is a cargo and people mover..
 
Ozair
Posts: 5582
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Tue Jan 19, 2021 1:33 am

texl1649 wrote:
Belgium just signed for 4 Sky Guardian MQ-9B’s. It looks to use the vehicles as well in the maritime surveillance/anti-submarine roles.

https://www.defensenews.com/native/gene ... -aircraft/

I think again that a mixed fleet of UAV’s and larger manned MPA platforms will be the normal/way forward in the future.


GA and the USN have reportedly been conducting trials with the MQ-9B.

Off the California coast, the US Navy tests hunting subs with an aerial drone

The U.S. Navy and General Atomics in November used sonobuoys dropped from an MQ-9A Block V Reaper to track a simulated submarine target on a U.S. Navy Pacific test range, in what GA says is the first time an aerial drone has deployed a self-contained anti-submarine warfare system.

The Reaper deployed a mix of 10 sonobuoys – deployed to measure water conditions and monitor for targets – then received and transmitted the data in real time to a monitoring station at Laguna Flight Operations Facility located at Yuma Proving Grounds in California.

The test was part of the development of the MQ-9B SeaGuardian drone, which is part of a research and development project in conjunction with the Navy’s Naval Air Systems Command. If the Navy can make this concept of operations work, it has the potential to significantly lower the cost of submarine hunting and free up larger, more expensive manned sub-hunting platforms such as the P-8A Poseidon, to act as a command-and-control platform.

...

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2021/ ... ial-drone/

This certainly makes the case for use of larger maritime patrol aircraft that could conceivably operate a fleet of UCAVs in the ASW and MARPAT role. The MQ-9B in this test transferred the snoar data back to a ground station which conducted the analysis and would also remove the need, certainly for smaller nations, of having a manned aircraft in the mix at all. For larger nations or those will larger coastal regions to patrol I cna see the manned aircraft still remaining.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Jan 20, 2021 8:40 pm

Certainly, Ozair 135. As well I'd keep in mind that these options will keep expanding/developing (beyond of course the MQ9b). For countries facing a lot of, for instance, piracy or Chinese fishing vessels operating illegally in their waters, this could be a very economical way to identify, document, track and then seek recourse from the operators, without necessarily an armed platform even.

What would be truly spectacular is if cheap LEO satellites (like the starlink fleet sort of) could also then track them back to port. P-3/Beagle size MPA's are I think a thing of the past, doctrinally.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Thu Jan 21, 2021 12:39 pm

I was unaware Australia was engaged as described in the HAPS (high altitude pseudo satellite) program. This is another area that could definitely complement MPA/P-8 operations if integrated well.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 57201.html
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Fri Jan 22, 2021 12:19 am

Related article today, this one using/reporting MQ-9 developments.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... and-drones
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sat Apr 10, 2021 4:32 pm

It seems the US is actively campaigning the P8 already to Germany..

https://aircosmosinternational.com/arti ... idons-3141

I guess the Germans / French will have to decide sooner than later.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:36 pm

This has already been discussed in the other thread. While personally I think it is a high possibility, the way the lot buy allotment is layed out German does not have to decide until the fall.

And even if they do buy, they can always sell it off once the A320 MMA is ready.
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Mortyman
Posts: 5928
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sun Apr 11, 2021 8:16 am

Only 10 hours endurance on the P-8 ? Surprised. Not the same as the P-3 is it ...
 
Reddevil556
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:55 pm

Having recently talked with a P-8 crewmember that was previously on the P-3, he stated the P-8 was much better to work in. If you are going to be in the air for hours on end every day, a turbofan is much more comfortable than a turboprop. Yeah yeah, I get it military planes aren't supposed to be comfortable. But having spent a lot of time in C17s and C130s, I would chose a C17 every time.
Jumped out of: C130H, C130J, C17A, C212, CH47, and UH60. Bucket list: C160, A400, C2
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:22 pm

Mortyman wrote:
Only 10 hours endurance on the P-8 ? Surprised. Not the same as the P-3 is it ...


This has been debated many times now. True, the P-3 has greater endurance. But the P-8 has faster dash speed to get to the search area faster, and cover more area once on station.

Loiter time is but a means to an end. If you want loiter time, send an UAV. If you want to find a sub or a wayward ship quickly, you'll have a better chance with a P-8A.

One thing that the P-8 or the A320 MMA has that the grown crew would appreciate over the P-3 is the waste removal procedure :ill: :yuck:
bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sun Apr 11, 2021 1:29 pm

Reddevil556 wrote:
Yeah yeah, I get it military planes aren't supposed to be comfortable.


But isn't efficiency an important part if a weapon system system? For tasks that require alertness and gray matter processing, physical comfort is part of the equasion.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sun Apr 11, 2021 5:38 pm

bikerthai wrote:
Mortyman wrote:
Only 10 hours endurance on the P-8 ? Surprised. Not the same as the P-3 is it ...


This has been debated many times now. True, the P-3 has greater endurance. But the P-8 has faster dash speed to get to the search area faster, and cover more area once on station.

Loiter time is but a means to an end. If you want loiter time, send an UAV. If you want to find a sub or a wayward ship quickly, you'll have a better chance with a P-8A.

One thing that the P-8 or the A320 MMA has that the grown crew would appreciate over the P-3 is the waste removal procedure :ill: :yuck:
bt


The P-8 in conjunction with a drone platform (likely predator/‘seaguardian’ MQ-9B based) is going to be an unbeatable turn key solution for decades to come once the USN pays to validate it. It also of course can be refueled in the air for more persistence. Finally, the weapons load out is just continuing to grow, and even more so with the Predators capabilities; this could also offer an ability for MQ-9B operators (France/Germany/Netherlands/Spain/UK/Italy/UAE etc.) to integrate/cooperate with P-8 users to jointly contribute assets/funding for shared missions. It would also be then capable of more sustained endurance/loiter/search as the UAV’s wouldn’t have to leave even if the P-8 had to return/no tankers available for a couple hours.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboo ... ber-164758

https://www.ga.com/ga-asi-completes-unm ... processing
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Sun Apr 11, 2021 11:09 pm

texl1649 wrote:
also of course can be refueled in the air for more persistence.


This is when comfort comes in to play. The E-7 which is also a 737 derivative once had a 17 hr mission with AAR.

http://www.boeing.com/features/2016/04/ ... 04-16.page

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Mortyman
Posts: 5928
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Mon Apr 12, 2021 6:06 am

texl1649 wrote:
bikerthai wrote:
Mortyman wrote:
Only 10 hours endurance on the P-8 ? Surprised. Not the same as the P-3 is it ...


This has been debated many times now. True, the P-3 has greater endurance. But the P-8 has faster dash speed to get to the search area faster, and cover more area once on station.

Loiter time is but a means to an end. If you want loiter time, send an UAV. If you want to find a sub or a wayward ship quickly, you'll have a better chance with a P-8A.

One thing that the P-8 or the A320 MMA has that the grown crew would appreciate over the P-3 is the waste removal procedure :ill: :yuck:
bt


The P-8 in conjunction with a drone platform (likely predator/‘seaguardian’ MQ-9B based) is going to be an unbeatable turn key solution for decades to come once the USN pays to validate it. It also of course can be refueled in the air for more persistence. Finally, the weapons load out is just continuing to grow, and even more so with the Predators capabilities; this could also offer an ability for MQ-9B operators (France/Germany/Netherlands/Spain/UK/Italy/UAE etc.) to integrate/cooperate with P-8 users to jointly contribute assets/funding for shared missions. It would also be then capable of more sustained endurance/loiter/search as the UAV’s wouldn’t have to leave even if the P-8 had to return/no tankers available for a couple hours.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboo ... ber-164758

https://www.ga.com/ga-asi-completes-unm ... processing




If only Norwegian politicians were smart enough to buy a drone platform ...
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Mon Apr 12, 2021 12:38 pm

Mortyman wrote:
If only Norwegian politicians were smart enough to buy a drone platform ...


All in due time and money. In the mean time if the need arise for emergency, it is easy enough to request to borrow drone support from your NATO allies.

With P-8A operating from Greenland to Norway, it should be routine passing drone control along the whole North Atlantic corridor.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Reddevil556
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Tue Apr 13, 2021 8:37 am

bikerthai wrote:
Reddevil556 wrote:
Yeah yeah, I get it military planes aren't supposed to be comfortable.


But isn't efficiency an important part if a weapon system system? For tasks that require alertness and gray matter processing, physical comfort is part of the equasion.

bt


Absolutely, a comfortable crew will certainly be more effective than an uncomfortable. It may seem trivial but on longer missions if you are uncomfortable you are much less focused on your tasks.
Jumped out of: C130H, C130J, C17A, C212, CH47, and UH60. Bucket list: C160, A400, C2
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 14183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: European Multirole MPA Replacement, C-500 Beagle Concept >2030

Wed Apr 14, 2021 1:02 pm

bikerthai wrote:
One thing that the P-8 or the A320 MMA has that the grown crew would appreciate over the P-3 is the waste removal procedure :ill: :yuck:
bt


P-3C.. :crazy: :yuck: it made sure everybody travelled light..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AC77X, dobilan and 20 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos