Prince Harry to fly the Apache … We shall see!

Amusing report from the Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7113309.ece

As we know Prince Harry has been training to fly AAC helicopters and will qualify soon. Report suggests he could be offered a place in the Apache.

Slight over simplification, he could be offered training in the Apache but that doesn’t mean he can handle the thing. Many a very capable AAC pilot has washed out of the Apache conversion course because they can’t handle the multi tasking required by this type or fly the bag. Edd Macy’s book has some interesting points about that.

So maybe he gets a chance at the Apache but he has publicly stated that he likes the Lynx.

Quoted posting deleted by moderator

Because Wanshan is a respected poster who up until you kicking off was having a reasoned debate with other forum members over the different scenarios that could of led up to the destruction of the corvette. At no point did he show any disrespect to the sailors on the corvette and for you to suggest so is rather offensive.

As usual, the rich acquiring expensive toys and the poor shopping cheaper.

France Competes With Cheap Chinese Crap

Qatar is buying new, jet propelled, Exocet anti-ship missiles, to replace the older, rocket propelled, models. The new missiles will be installed on some of the seven Qatari fast attack boats (which also have either 76mm cannon or 30mm machine-guns). The new Exocet MM Block 3 have twice the range (180 kilometers) because of their turbojet engine.

The new Exocet is partly a response to competition from China. Recently, for example, Indonesia chose cheaper, and longer range, Chinese C802A anti-ship missiles over the rocket propelled Exocet. The C802A is a 6.8m (21 foot) long, 360mm diameter, 682kg (1,500 pound) missile, with a 165kg (360 pound) warhead. The C802 has a max range of 120 kilometers, and moves along at about 250 meters a second.

The French Exocet missile is the same size and performance, but costs twice as much (over a million dollars each, but the manufacturer is known to be flexible on pricing.)

Full Story

Well a rather strange statement to make about the C802, as far as I am aware it is anything but crappy!

Then I clicked on the link and realised it was an opinion piece by the Tabloid newspaper of defence websites “Strategy Page”…really Tango III usually you submit reasoned reports from respect websites not the trash they usually produce!

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/04/27/341145/japan-seeks-foreign-engines-for-stealth-fighter-prototypes.html

Very interesting — so this basically seem to indicate that the Japanese are still considering to develop their own VLO fighter? But why then the interest in F-35?

A stop gap until they have a stealthy twin engine replacement for the F15.

Grim901 :

Yes , there is another alternative : Europe should build 5 similar Carriers , 1 for France , 2 for the UK , 1 for Spain and 1 for Italy . Then we all go with 2 different aircraft : Rafale and “Seaphoon” . The UK and Italy with Seaphoon , France and Spain with Rafale .
What have the technology and the money , only the will is lacking unfortunately .

True , RN ‘s mistake and a critical one . They were just too shy and too conservative . I blame the RN .

Cheers .

I must admit you are highly opinionated but light in knowledge Bluewings, that I find myself agreeing with Pfcem somebody I usually lock horns with should tell you something.

To pick up your points whilst the RN does have a CATOBAR option it has wisely decided to stick with what it knows at this point and explore other options in the future, in the end the the F35B offers a significant performance advantage over the Harrier GR7/9 and Sea Harrier FA2. For the Royal navy which is fighting a serious battle with the Army and Air force just to retain a carrier capability its a bit strong to blame them for going down the STOVL route when they had good reason to do it. As for Italy and Spain I have posted two pictures which should give you the strong and clear reason why they have to go down the STOVL route:

Both these nations have now built new carriers that can only operate STOVL types, to go ahead and build CATOBAR carriers now would be insane. The AV8B is now out of production and the F35B as I have said for the UK will offer superior performance. Considering that the very limited Sea Harrier FRS1 has proven itself to be effective in real combat the F35B should prove itself more then acceptable to the UK RN, USMC, Italian and Spanish navies.

I have posted a link to the excellent Navy Matters website and its section on the CVF class so you can do some proper reading on the subject before you put fingers to keyboard my old boy.

http://navy-matters.beedall.com/cvfmain.htm

I have a hunch that if CVA01 had entered service the Ikara and Sea Dart mounts would of been deleted during its mid life refit anyway and the flight deck extended aft.

Nuclear power certainly makes sense for a country which likes to operate ocean going subs like Australia but I think there are too many barriers to it happening. I would think public opinion would be massively against it and whilst as you say personel have exchanged with the RN and USN it would still be a massively complicated and expensive process to set up the facilities and train personel. That is a serious issue for a nation which already has trouble crewing and maintaining the subs it has.

Also I would hardly say that India’s or Brazil’s nuclear sub programs are glowing examples of inducting the technology into service, both have been going on for decades and only with major outside help. Whilst the US, UK and France would probably be more then happy to sell the technology it would still be a prohibative cost, so much so it would probably be better to buy a variant of the Asture, Virginia or Barracuda straight off the shelf which I bet won’t go down well with the voting public of Australia (loss of jobs etc).

The earlier Navantia S-80A class might be a better bet in my opinion. It is already a stretch over the Scorpene, has an effective MTU engine installation and AIP. The CMS is American and its compatable with Tomahawk. Your country is already building a working naval relationship with Spain and as the linked document about the project below states the Spanish are rather pragmatic about the development noting the Collins class and stating that if they don’t feel confident in a technology area they get in somebody who can for example Bae Systems Barrow for the complex bow and stern dome. I would think a super stretch variant of the S-80 might go down very well. A stretch variant would allow more space for AIP propellant or cells and even VLS for stand off cruise missiles.

http://www.navantia.es/irj/go/km/docs/documents/Portal%20Navantia/Noticias/Navantia%20es%20noticia%20PDFs/026-031_JNI_DEC07.indd.pdf