Indeed it is adequate for QRA if they get decent ground based radar to direct them. They have requested the Lockheed Martin TPS-77 but I don’t know where they are with that.
The precision strike capability they bring with LGB and Maverick seems to be more important along with the DB110 reconnaissance pods.
M61 Vulcan 20mm
AIM-9M
AIM-7M
F16-IQ is a complete joke really. they’re OK ground attack planes and maybe for tactical recon. but for air defence completely and utterly useless.
No sorry sheytanelkebir whilst I think your input is very useful to this forum I can’t let that ride as it frankly is utterly absurd!
The F-16 is not useless in any sense of the word it comes to air defence even with the air to air fit that is being currently provided. I know you have a hang up over the US not providing AMRAAM or AIM9X but it wrong to say the type is useless.
There is no anti-F-35 hate storm happening. What is happening is a crowd of LM worshippers who first claim nonsense about future capabilities and then whine and overprotectively attack anyone who points at a simple fact that those magical capabilities ain’t happening. Simple as that..
I was going to write a long snarky reply about throwing rocks in glass houses then I remembered this is far simpler:
POT
KETTLE
BLACK
I think another pertinent question is: Where are the GCC states in all of this?
Oh yes I remember! Bombing Shia Houthi rebels in Yemen who want such evil dastardly things as: government accountability, the end to corruption, regular utilities, fair fuel prices, job opportunities for ordinary Yemenis and the end of Western influence!
OK the Houthi rebels are widely supported amongst the Yemeni population and desire to set up a representative democratic Republic and have stated they don’t want to set up a cleric led Iranian style government and are already running peoples councils in Sana’a. Of course we can’t have that kind of thing breaking out can we so of course the GCC need to prioritise bombing Yemen over taking on ISIS…
Yes I can deny it because there is not one shred of evidence from any official Chinese source that they will be buying the Su-35. It is a possibility certainly but not as you assert a fact.
Show me an official statement by the China Air Force that they are in negotiations at least. An opinion piece in a Taiwanese or Russian web site citing the speculation of Taiwanese defence bloggers or Russian officials not actually involved in any form of negotiations with China is not good enough.
Your insistence on citing the most derided source for news about Chinese military procurement WantChinaTimes makes you look silly blackadam.
blackadam you have been told before that wantchinatimes is not a good primary source when researching Chinese military procurement, actually it is treated in a rather derisory manor amongst enthusiast on the subject.
We have seen report after report over the last few years that an Su-35 order was needed or just around the corner but nothing to show from official sources that any such deal is happening or even close.
wantchinatimes is just rehashing old speculation based upon the recent release of pictures for the J-11D, this is becoming a habit for that kind of publication. Every time a new Chinese fighter variant is displayed there is a flurry of opinion articles from Taiwanese or Russian sites about a possible Su-35 purchase.
Nothing is impossible Vnomad, in respect of the Astute there would be some issues. Basically the program is winding down, any Nuclear submarine India could buy from the UK would be Astute derived but not the same. The major issue is the reactor, no more PWR2 are being produced once Astute production has finished. The UK is moving to PWR3 for the Successor SSBN and no doubt any future SSN program. Problem is PWR3 is derived from an American design and I doubt the Americans will be happy to allow onwards selling to the Indian navy.
I would say France would be a far better bet.
The full radio conversation:
https://soundcloud.com/marcus-weisgerber-1/p-8-encounter-with-chinese-navy
Rather interesting, the US crew stick to their script as do the Chinese. I noted there was a switch of operators on the Chinese side, the last guy was almost comical.
To be honest Blitzo whilst better than nothing those two Hamilton class were hardly the deal of the century! Two vessels built in the 1960’s with equipment removed before delivery to the Philippines. Part of the problem the Philippine navy faces is the vast majority of their fleet is second hand and elderly, the older a piece of equipment the greater the maintenance.
To be honest it made me chuckle when he shouted “You Go”! But you are right more lost in translation than anything else, your observation that they fall short of saying Chinese territory is worth noting. My gut feeling is China is slowly trying to move towards a de facto state of ownership.
Personally I think the US need to look at helping other players in the area like the Philippines improve their forces to better patrol the region.
As for the Coastguard cutter, 76mm is pretty much as big as I would expect for that kind of vessel.
YOU GO!
Further from that here is a quote from a local to Nepal helicopter training company:
Steven Bruce Bokan, chief flying instructor for Nepalese helicopter company Manang Air, said the British Chinooks and US Ospreys were ‘basically useless’ in the Himalayas.
‘They may work in deserts and other places which have huge areas for landing and take-off, but they are too big to land in the Himalayas,’ Bokan told AFP.
‘The Osprey is a massive aircraft – it needs an area the size of a football field to land safely, otherwise it can blow people over.’
‘It’s not rocket science – smaller helicopters like the French Squirrel helicopters have been flying here for years because they work in this environment,’ added Bokan, an Australian who has been flying helicopters for 26 years.
Bokan said that although the British Chinooks were not suitable to land in the mountains, they could be useful as aerial cranes to transport building materials and other heavy equipment to remote areas inaccessible by road.Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3075664/Quake-hit-Nepal-denies-entry-British-helicopters.html#ixzz3aIXIhRbY
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
WHAT A STEAMING PILE OF SELF INTERESTED BOLLARDS! Sorry for the rant but what the hell does he think the RAF has been doing with the Chinook in Afghanistan???!!! They were the most suited helicopters to operations in the mountains after the Mi17 so I don’t quite see how he draws that conclusion beyond self interest. The Osprey has still done sterling work in Nepal over the last week or so even with restrictions.
The whole wing not fitting issue was a smoke screen for deeper project management issues! If one of the project managers on the MRA4 program jumped into a time machine and went back to the original Hawker Siddeley line in the 1960’s and told one of the engineers that the wings didn’t fit on the new Nimrod he would get a rather curt reply along the lines of:
“So what? They don’t fit on our old Nimrods as well!”
Nimrod was built upon an airframe considered dated in the 1960’s, each airframe was unique and it was totally normal for the people on the production floor to make adjustments to fit.
BAE Systems failed to have the project management in place to properly handle these issues compounded by their solution to outsource to other companies who also didn’t. As I understand it they didn’t seek out people who were involved in the original production of the Nimrod who could of forewarned them, forewarned they could’ve factored in the work required.
If this story is true it makes reasonable sense, it would make a big splash for the next defence review. The RAF have crews trained on the type and there is plenty of logic buying into what the Americans are buying. My guess Sentinel would have to go but there is an alternative radar that can be slung on the P8.