I’m pretty sure Bill lives in the DC area and would be happy since the JSF program is of critical importance to his employers bottom line.

Then regular fly-bys are needed me thinks!

To be honest he is a spent force on the matter, his last gleeful horaah was the his shilling of the ‘War is boring article’ “F-35 Can’t dogfight” that misinterpreted an angle of attack test for an early prototype with support from an F-16 as some major disaster for the program rather than a normal test used to expand the envelope of the aircraft followed by several days of him lording it over the forums with his alter ego (that is totally not somebody that uses a handle that rhymes with Bow and Conservable) in self righteous ‘I told you so glee’ before an actual test pilot told him to wind his neck in as the article was total garbage…

Fun times!

An F-35A Lightning II from the 34th Fighter Squadron at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, lands at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, April 15, 2017. The aircraft arrival marks the first F-35A fighter training deployment to the U.S. European Command area of responsibility or any overseas location as a flying training deployment. (U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Eric Burks)

F-35A Lightning II’s from the 34th Fighter Squadron at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, land at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, April 15, 2017. The aircraft arrival marks the first F-35A fighter training deployment to the U.S. European Command area of responsibility or any overseas location as a flying training deployment. (U.S. Air Force photo/Tech. Sgt. Matthew Plew)

An F-35 Lightning II from the 34th Fighter Squadron at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, taxis in at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, April 15, 2017. The aircraft arrival marks the first F-35A fighter training deployment to the U.S. European Command area of responsibility or any overseas location as a flying training deployment. (U.S. Air Force photo/Staff Sgt. Emerson Nuñez)

Hopefully they flew formation over Bill Sweetman’s house whilst he was standing in his Garden waving an impotent fist shouting noooooooo!

Or was he just keeping Low Oberservable?

Hmmmmm, i have the feeling that Aero Vodochody is a bit optimistic here, the ALCA would be a straight contender with FADEA´s own IA-63 Pampa batch III, and even that the Argentine MOD “iced it”.

As I pointed out before the L-159 ALCA is in a different performance class to the Pampa, also the L-159 ALCA is a real thing in production (relaunched) unlike the IA-63 Pampa Batch III which has been repeatedly launched (repainting and wheeling out the 20 year old prototype) yet we haven’t seen much along the lines of actual production.

My point is that FAA could get the same capability (radar + PGM) easier, cheaper and with partially exploiting internal capacities. Therefore it makes no sense to buy the L-159. If they have not grabbed the offer for the dirt-cheap 2nd hand machines which went to Draken Intl., they probably won’t buy new-built ones, either..

FAdeA have been repainting and wheeling out the same prototype for near on twenty years, there have been more than one order made for upgraded Pampa yet none have left the factory. In the meantime they have purchased the T-6 Texan II from the US a type that has a performance that crosses over the IA-63.

FAdeA is full of La Campora placements who have shown little acumen for the roles they have been placed in and so far I am highly sceptical that it is any easier or cheaper to try and get an upgraded Pampa out of the factory any time soon.

There is little performance benefit of the L-159 compared to argentina’s own ia-63 pampa. Better to go for L-15 or FA-50 imo.

The L-159 ALCA is in a different performance class to the IA-63. The Former is an combat aircraft conceptually similar to the BAe Strikemaster based upon an Intermediate to Advanced conversion trainer whilst the latter is a Basic to Intermediate trainer which has been pressed into the Advanced role. The L-159 has superior max ceiling and climb rate over the IA-63.

The L-159 ALCA also has a radar and the ability to carry precision munitions unlike the Pampa.

No I don’t agree Swerve, it makes no logical sense to pay AirTanker to amend the contract to provide an ad-hoc and rarely used air sampling capability. AirTanker would charge a pretty penny to do it.

It is far more logical if the MOD really wants the capability back to put the pods on UK MOD and taxpayer owned types, out of the large types in UK service or future service with suitable wing stations to do it that leaves A400M Atlas or Voyager. Possibly C-130J but I don’t know if UK examples of the type have the wing station mounting points for pylons. Atlas and Poseidon definitely do out of the factory.

you can’t change reality. Russia does not need desperate phone calls to Qatar. Germany will need all this external help.

The RAF VC-10s used to be fitted with a pod. It doesn’t appear that the RAF Voyagers took over the role after the VC-10s were retired.

During 2006 and 2009 the RAF deployed VC-10s equipped with the sampling pods to Okinawa after North Korean nuclear tests.

Footage of one of the pod equipped RAF VC-10s landing at Okinawa to assist the USAF WC-135.

See from 1:07

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg-5ZsIFwIQ

Image of one of the pods fitted to an RAF VC-10 at Kadena. See following link.

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ground-crew-members-work-on-a-pod-of-a-british-royal-airforce-vc-10-116747973.html

Fitting air sampling pods to monitor radiation would be outside the contract with AirTanker the company that owns the Voyager Tankers so not that likely. The air sampling pods pods are converted Hawker Hunter drop tanks apparently, they originally hung off the Skybolt Pylons of Avro Vulcans (there is a nice picture of XH558 equipped as such). When the Vulcans were retired the pods were passed onto the Victor K2 and when that was retired the VC-10.

You could probably hang the pod fairly easily off the wing refuelling pod station for the A400M Atlas, after that the only really suitable type to carry the pods would be the P-8a when it enters service.

To be honest whilst the pods are probably still sitting in an RAF Warehouse somewhere it is a capability that has probably been quietly allowed to slip with the MOD probably not that interested in integrating and testing the pods on another type and anybody who knows how to deploy them has been pensioned off hence why the USAF had to step in when this happened.