mattOriginally posted by google
Maybe they didn’t keep good lab notebooks and had terrible handwriting?:)
LOL..
But honestly….The first thing ur supposed to do when ur testing and stuff is to keep logs and stuff..what happend to all that?
mattshouldnt the F/A – 18 be compared to a navalised Mig? i thought the F/A-18 was mostly a navy thing
mattIt does not make sence, most of the data and information including manufacturing and FRACA drafts should have been on paper or on pc.. i doubt the fact they shelved it because no one else could carry the work on..
mattis the f-100 the fat guy who lost his reindears?
matthmm low viz grey is camo isnt it? i mean your not going to get flying shrubs or foliage, although that would be interesting
maybe just indicates their confidence in Surface to air defence systems
mattyou guys got more?
mattLM statement sounds childish.. bad loosers i guess..
Goooo the Gripen!
I mean come on, they are telling the Czech’s what the Czech’s need.
How much are the 3 systems offered for? and what package is offered?
mattnice pics.. how old are the pics?
mattHopefully the guys or girls walked away!
Fingers crossed
mattAnother Magazine worth it is the 100 years of flight put together by key publishing.. erm yeah that sounded like a plug.. no i dont work for them.. lol.. but its got a timeline throughout the magazine of first flights. its pretty good.
mattWhy waste resources aiming for the moon? i dont get it. America’s been there done that, they should go to TITAN and sort something out for that moon in the next few years, if any place is habitable (if you dont mind Sub zero) its got to be TITAN.
mattNot bad for 8 hourse of flight time on the tornado.
!!!! How is it bad for the pilot? if anything they/he should get a bloomin medal!
Only other thing would have been to eject and let the plane crash.
mattI doubt that because they agreed to it, along with the prices quaoted to them. Maybe CAG is going over it with a fine tooth comb. who knows..
mattMoD scuppers bicentenary of Trafalgar
SORRY This is not modern military, but its starting to show a trend in the MOD. CAN I SWEAR AT THEM??????????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MoD scuppers bicentenary of Trafalgar
By Isambard Wilkinson in Madrid and Benedict Brogan
(Filed: 05/12/2003)
Royal Navy plans to mark the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar with a review of the fleet are being blocked by the Government on the grounds of cost.
Adml Sir Alan West, the First Sea Lord, wants the centrepiece of the Navy’s celebrations honouring Horatio Nelson’s defining victory off Spain’s Atlantic coast to be a gathering of warships from around the globe.
A significant proportion of the Navy’s largest vessels would be expected to take part in the review at Spithead, Portsmouth.
But Whitehall is resisting the expense and says that many ships are deployed in the Gulf and cannot be withdrawn.
The stand-off emerged as an internal briefing paper seen by The Telegraph yesterday showed that the Armed Forces budget crisis is about to worsen.
Pressure is mounting because of the £5.5 billion expenditure on the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq and the war on terrorism.
A “thorough examination of costs” is being carried out by the Ministry of Defence. That, it is feared, will lead to further cuts in the numbers of tanks, ships and aircraft to allow for the purchase of more high-tech systems.
The paper states: “The aim of the exercise is both to reduce costs (especially overheads) and, importantly, to provide choice and planning flexibility.”
The Tories and former members of the Defence Staff say the Forces are already over-stretched and will not be able to bear more cuts.
Despite the financial pressure, the Admiralty feels passionately that it must do justice in 2005 to the Navy’s greatest victory and the death of its greatest hero, Vice-Adml Lord Nelson.
The review is being planned on a grander scale than the last great naval gathering: for the Queen’s Silver Jubilee in 1977.
The Admiralty plans to invite many foreign ships to take part, with French and Spanish warships, the descendants of the losers at Trafalgar, taking pride of place.
As part of the celebrations, the Navy is negotiating with Spain to send a warship to Cape Trafalgar to lay a wreath and to offer a gun salute on the spot where “the Noble Commander-in-Chief” fell, his body later being placed in a cask of brandy to be shipped back to England.
Other Navy plans include a parade through Trafalgar Square and a VIP dinner in Nelson’s cabin on board his flagship, Victory, at Portsmouth dockyard.
The Government has designated 2005 as the Year of the Sea, with a website, SeaBritain, of which Prince Philip, a former naval officer, is the patron.
A Navy spokesman acknowledged that the dispute with Whitehall was delaying final plans.
“It is frustrating not to be able to have firm details,” he said. “It is, as always, a question of getting permission from the centre and, of course, money.”
If Whitehall wins the tussle, naval chiefs say that the commemoration of the Royal Navy’s most glorious hour will go off at half-****.
The two fleets met off Cape Trafalgar on Oct 21, 1805. The engagement was one of the most decisive victories in the history of naval warfare, with 18 of the 33 French and Spanish captured or sunk.
Not a single Royal Navy ship was lost, but Adml Nelson was wounded and died aboard Victory.
The battle ended for ever Napoleon’s schemes to invade Britain and laid the foundations for the Royal Navy’s unchallenged sovereignty of the world’s oceans for a century.
Adml of the Fleet Sir Julian Oswald, a former first sea lord, underlined the Navy’s debt to Nelson.
He said yesterday: “He was the greatest. This brilliant, enigmatic, flawed leader and extremely successful admiral gave us a decade of stunning naval victories.
“He finally nailed the threat of French invasion and assured us the position of 100 years of naval mastery.”
mattfrom news.scotsman.com
MoD considers sharing new aircraft carriers
GETHIN CHAMBERLAIN DEFENCE CORRESPONDENT
BRITAIN and France could link up to build two aircraft carriers which would be used by the armed forces of both countries to save money on defence budgets and increase the military co-operation between the two countries.
The extraordinary deal is one of a number of proposals being considered by the Ministry of Defence to enable it to cut costs and to maintain manpower within the British armed forces.
Sources say the decision has been taken to spare historic regiments when the results of a review are announced in the government’s white paper on defence in the next couple of weeks.
But that has left the ministry looking for somewhere else for the axe to fall, and the carrier project appears vulnerable.
Charles Heyman, the senior defence analyst for Jane’s Consultancy Group, said yesterday: “Most analysts believe that the current carrier project is going to be difficult to fit into the MoD’s long-term costing and that something is going to give.
“Recent defence market gossip suggests some sort of deal with the French is being considered; possibly one new carrier each within a bilateral defence agreement whereby, in the event of an emergency, the carrier available for operations (if only one is at sea) is made available to the other nation.”
The British government had previously appeared keen to build two 50,000-tonne carriers, with the first due to go into service in 2012, followed by the second in 2015.
But the cost of the project, estimated at £2.9 billion, has raised question marks over the programme’s viability. With the Treasury keen to trim defence spending, the MoD has been faced with tough decisions on where the cuts should fall.
There has been speculation that some infantry regiments might face the axe, but military sources have suggested the stories are without foundation. Last week, the defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, appeared to rule out any such cuts.
With that money-saving ruled out, eyes have turned to the navy and the RAF. The RAF is expected to be told it will not get the third tranche of Eurofighters it had been expecting, but it is the aircraft carriers that offer the greatest opportunity for cost-cutting.
Last week it was suggested that Britain and France could co-operate on the building of carriers, using the same design to trim costs.
But the alternative proposal – which defence sources say has been given serious consideration – goes much further.
Under this plan Britain would build only one aircraft carrier while France would build the second. Both would be compatible with the French Dassault Rafale aircraft rather than the Joint Strike Fighter, which had been earmarked for the British carriers. The carriers could be used by the air and naval air forces of both countries.
Nicholas Soames, the shadow defence secretary, described the plans as a “lunatic suggestion”.
“The British carriers are part of our strategy for expeditionary capabilities. It is simply not possible for Britain to operate in such a way with a country with which it finds itself so frequently at odds,” he said.
Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat’s foreign affairs spokesman and MP for North East Fife, said: “If these reports are true, they would represent a remarkable development in European defence co-operation.
“But previous experience with the French leads one to believe that such arrangements, while desirable in principle, could be very difficult in practice.”
Sign In
