Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

The J vs K Thread. Pacifists keep out.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

The J vs K Thread. Pacifists keep out.

Old 5th Mar 2006, 00:09
  #21 (permalink)  
adr

PPatRoN
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: England
Posts: 305
First Googlefight! Second Googlefight!



adr
adr is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 00:20
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 45
I love that site!

Try this Googlefight
Guy Willesley is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 00:33
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 82
Why can't we focus on how the K and J can best do the job together instead of pissing and moaning about the other fleet.
FACT - The K is dieing but its got a good few years in yet
FACT - The K is overborne with aircrew and as not enough frames
FACT - The K is severely performance limited
FACT - The J still does not have all the necessary clearances or kit (yet)
FACT - The J is going to end up at least filling the gaps in the "70 sqn deployment" if not doing it all
FACT - The K and J each have their good and bad points and if we were to focus on how best to perform combined ops then it'd be a lot better for both fleets
theboywide is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 00:52
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 45
Performing combined ops would require more engineering and spares support than single type ops. It would be better to try for one det one type.
Guy Willesley is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 01:50
  #25 (permalink)  

Short Blunt Shock
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
FACT - The K is severely performance limited
No, it isn't.

Performing combined ops would require more engineering and spares support than single type ops. It would be better to try for one det one type.
You don't need Eng support to run a Det. You need a GE and a phone. THAT'S IT. Any doubters should look to the near-100% serviceability of a certain long-standing K det.

We manage that one quite nicely without Adminers as well, curiously.

All you NEED for a det is 1 aircraft, 1 crew, 2 GEs. (or 1 crew, 2 GEs per aircraft). It works. We've done it, we've been doing it for a long time. No Eng det, no Ops, no Int cell, no 'DETCO', no army of adminers, coppers, movers, hangers-on, or anyone else. (OK, admittedly, you need some kind of J4 organisation to dove-tail it into everything else). It sometimes makes me think the Army / Navy have a point when they castigate our manpower levels...

Concur with the 'spares' thing though - although all that would need is twice as much space to store spares held on site - which is usually f**k-all to start with since we can't afford it.

16B
16 blades is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 12:02
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 119
Quote:
FACT - The K is severely performance limited
No, it isn't.
A well thought out response backed up with reasoned argument and facts!!!!


The K is severely performance limited, in comparison to the J, for example: Moving loads out of Afghan after the initial conflict, J using NOS was offering 7/8 tonnes more payload than the K using MOS.
LunchMonitor is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 12:37
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: my own little world
Posts: 119
The K manages to keep hold of it's life rafts, unlike the J.
The K doesn't try and mush up internal organs, unlike the J (depending where you sit).
If the J lasts as long as the K will it ever be as good?
K aircrew like to remove the intake blanks pre-flight, unlike J aircrew [email protected]#kers!!!
monkeybumhead is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 13:05
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,552
Some good news for you who might otherwise doubt that fine Airbus Military aeroplane, the A400M:

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...h+8-blade.html

Note this in particular: "The development engine has already achieved its stated maximum rating of 10,690shp (7,965kN)."
BEagle is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 13:28
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Angry

Ahhhhhhhh,

I see that we didn't manage to procure any objectivity as either part of the latest J software load or as another awkward bolt-on for the K. I wonder exactly how much energy (to the nearest 1000 man-days) you people have wasted fighting each other instead of making the C130 force work effectively together. Most people recognise that both aircraft still have a lot to offer - not that you'd get that impression here.

Frankly nobody outside Lyneham and 2 Gp really gives a t*ss which model of C130 is tasked as long as it turns up on time and gets the job done. And (for the public domain) nobody outside Lyneham, 2 Gp and the Para Reg really gives a t*ss what each type of aircraft can drop out of the back - the primary role is AT, not meat-bombing battlefields and providing target practice for a variety of widely-exported Russian SAMs.

Lyneham used to be massively divisive in the old days of pure K rivalry and nothing seems to have changed - even though half the J guys have masses of K experience. Wonder if you'll take your petty ways across to Brize in 5 years to whine about the A330, C17 and A400M.

SS
SlipperySlappery is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 13:33
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 2,165
Originally Posted by SlipperySlappery
Wonder if you'll take your petty ways across to Brize in 5 years to whine about the A330, C17 and A400M.
Cannot see anyone whining about A330 or A400M in five years time, unless its to say "When will they enter service"

Still its not all bad news on A400M, at least the engine is off the drawing board.
ZH875 is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 14:01
  #31 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,317
Not sure I'd want to fly in a UK A400. See this:

In this week's flight international(28/2/06) it has been reveal that of all the launch customers for the A400M have selected fuel tank inerting systems and the U.K has not, which was recommended for fitting to C130's by board of inquiry following the lost of a C130k in iraq.
Also it states that UK MOD has removed the Defensive countermeasures equipment in all but 9 of the 25 planes in order to save £240 Millon($417 Million).
it also says the A400m will be declared operational during 2007 following the delivery of aircraft no 7.


source
Flight international
Thanks to Cyrilranch on the (decent) RN board
Navaleye is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 15:16
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 45
You don't need Eng support to run a Det. You need a GE and a phone. THAT'S IT. Any doubters should look to the near-100% serviceability of a certain long-standing K det.
You really believe that you can run a 4 aircraft det with a couple of GEs and whatever spares you can scrape together to take with you? If that's the case, either you're responsible for K availability rates or it's true that you guys have been too long out of the saddle.

And BEags, we all know you work for Airbus now but please stop being a salesman on PPRuNe. It's against the rules for posting. (And your flawed design is still only that. High T-tail to avoid transonic propwash over the elevators.... )

Monkeybumhead, good argument. Must check on the number of quadruple prop changes J's have required at Basrah, straight after I've replaced some lighting stanchions for you in Bahrain.
Guy Willesley is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 15:33
  #33 (permalink)  

Short Blunt Shock
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
You really believe that you can run a 4 aircraft det with a couple of GEs and whatever spares you can scrape together to take with you?
It's been working for 1 aircraft for several years now. Why not 4? You don't need an army of electronics experts to get a K working - just a hairy man with a big hammer.

you guys have been too long out of the saddle.
Thanks, Guy, that gave me a real laugh!

Bless 'em - they 'route queen' their way around the desert and they think that makes them punchy war heroes! Awww! how cute....

16B
16 blades is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 15:38
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 36
...as opposed to 'route queening' their way around the LA hold

''Another tricky BRAVO departure then nav''....
Arty is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 16:12
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 45
16B,

I've been on one aircraft dets several times now, and it works fabulously with 2 GEs and good Eng support in Lyneham. A big hairy bloke and a hammer can't fix most things though, otherwise the K would have more aircraft on the line than it does!

As for 'route queening' round the desert, you do the guys a disservice. They've been there for coming on 3 years now and have developed new tactics to fit the different capabilities of the J, the theatre it's in and the threat they're actually up against - and the engineers are still maintaining an almost 100% servicability rate.
Guy Willesley is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 17:10
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 94
FFS fellas this is pathetic!

Who cares about which is better? Both are good at some things and not at others. I fly the K but I don't begrudge the J guys. As was already said as long as a Herc turns up and does the job everyones happy.

Controversial Tim - you are a tosser of the highest order for kicking this off again, even worse than those that get drawn into the bickering.
skaterboi is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 17:23
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Turks and Cacos
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by 16 blades
It's been working for 1 aircraft for several years now. Why not 4? You don't need an army of electronics experts to get a K working - just a hairy man with a big hammer. 16B
Ah! So they fly all day and then have to fix it once it lands as the crew head off for a wind down beer? On the down days it's a chance to get the wheel change or the brake unit change done. Get a grip 16B

Just work them 24/7 until they PVR

Originally Posted by 16 blades
Bless 'em - they 'route queen' their way around the desert and they think that makes them punchy war heroes! Awww! how cute....
That really is uncalled for and quite a nasty comment.

24 and 30 have been working their little butts off for the last 3 years with minimum time at home.
On_The_Top_Bunk is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 18:01
  #38 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,317
I must be honest and say that the "mine's better than yours" banter between the J and K fraternity is wearing a little thin. I thought we all worked together. Change is not always easy.
Navaleye is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 18:03
  #39 (permalink)  

Short Blunt Shock
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Sorry - I thought this was a BANTER thread.

My mistake.

16B
16 blades is offline  
Old 5th Mar 2006, 18:13
  #40 (permalink)  
Suspicion breeds confidence
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,317
16b,

We bought new model because we needed them and the old one was out of production. What more needs to be said? They are both fine aircraft.
Navaleye is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.